Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Suggestions for plugin improvements #15

Closed
imanushin opened this issue Jun 12, 2019 · 4 comments
Closed

Suggestions for plugin improvements #15

imanushin opened this issue Jun 12, 2019 · 4 comments

Comments

@imanushin
Copy link

imanushin commented Jun 12, 2019

Because of issue srs/gradle-node-plugin#315 I suggest to:

  • Rename plugin (to avoid collision on the plugin storage).
  • Redirect source code to this project of the newly published plugin
  • Configure publication by using one of the popular build systems
  • Drop compatibility with the old code:
    • Use Java 8+(probably java 11+ to reduce platform variability)
    • Use Gradle 5.4.1 (the latest one)
@deepy
Copy link
Member

deepy commented Jun 12, 2019

Is there currently a collision or need to redirect?
https://plugins.gradle.org/plugin/com.github.node-gradle.node
https://plugins.gradle.org/plugin/com.moowork.node

As for publications, there's #10, but as I'm currently the only person actively working on the fork I've not really looked at it.

As for compatibility, I want to finish the backporting before dropping any compatibility and where I work there's a few people still on Gradle 4 so initially it'd probably be Gradle 4.10 as lowest version (to get access to some of the new APIs) but I'm open to the idea of dropping Gradle 4 support a few months later :-)

@imanushin
Copy link
Author

@deepy , agree with you regarding the minimal version. And yes, there are not collision at gradle.org (sorry for inconvenience).

I'll take a look on publication and return with proposed PR (and build system configuration details)

@deepy deepy changed the title Rename plugin Suggestions for plugin improvements Jun 19, 2019
@bsautel
Copy link
Contributor

bsautel commented May 21, 2020

I think we can close this issue, right?

The two remaining items are in issues #10 and #62.

@imanushin
Copy link
Author

I think yes.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants