Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Publish 0.2.0 from master branch
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
@fsteeg
fsteeg committed May 19, 2022
1 parent 14805e9 commit 659a551
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 2 changed files with 9 additions and 1 deletion.
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion build.gradle
View file
Expand Up @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ subprojects {
}

group = 'org.metafacture'
version = '0.2.0-SNAPSHOT'
version = '0.2.0'

apply plugin: 'checkstyle'
apply plugin: 'eclipse'
Expand Down
8 changes: 8 additions & 0 deletions metafix-runner/build.gradle
View file
Expand Up @@ -9,6 +9,14 @@ dependencies {
implementation "org.metafacture:metafacture-json:${versions.metafacture}"
implementation "org.metafacture:metafacture-runner:${versions.metafacture}"
implementation "org.metafacture:metafacture-xml:${versions.metafacture}"
implementation "org.metafacture:metafacture-formeta:${versions.metafacture}"

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Copy link
@blackwinter

blackwinter May 19, 2022

Member

Why would these changes only be in publish, not in master?

[Also, I'd prefer them to be sorted ;)]

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Copy link
@blackwinter

blackwinter May 20, 2022

Member

Okay, so you removed them again in af93190, but I still don't understand: Why would any changes only be in the published artifact, but not in the main branch?

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Copy link
@fsteeg

fsteeg May 20, 2022

Author Member

Mainly because I consider it a temporary workaround for making command-line usage of Flux available. If I understand it correctly, you set up the metafix-runner for the integration tests. In the future, we should be able to use fix with the regular core distribution, so ideally we won't need a metafix-runner with these additional dependencies again. At the same time, I am fine with adding them too.

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Copy link
@blackwinter

blackwinter May 20, 2022

Member

Mainly because I consider it a temporary workaround for making command-line usage of Flux available.

Fair enough. I'm not opposed to including workarounds if we need them, even if they're just temporary. It's just that the commit wasn't in master at the time and that is something we should avoid IMO (at least for regular releases).

If I understand it correctly, you set up the metafix-runner for the integration tests.

Correct. But if it just so happens that you add an integration test that incidentally needs exactly those dependencies, we simply have to add them ;)

In the future, we should be able to use fix with the regular core distribution, so ideally we won't need a metafix-runner with these additional dependencies again.

What would that entail? We'd have to add metafacture-fix as a dependency to metafacture-runner, right? But you can already achieve the same outcome by placing the metafacture-fix JAR in the metafacture-core distribution's plugins/ directory. I know I'm missing something.

At the same time, I am fine with adding them too.

I wouldn't mind (too much) either. Maybe mark them as a workaround so we know not to remove them just because they're not required in the project itself?

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Copy link
@fsteeg

fsteeg May 20, 2022

Author Member

But you can already achieve the same outcome by placing the metafacture-fix JAR in the metafacture-core distribution's plugins/ directory. I know I'm missing something.

Right, that's what I tried first, but it fails due to some dependency conflicts, I guess related to ANTLR (used both by Flux and indirectly by Fix). My hope would be that for the next Fix release, we can make that work and no longer need the metafix-runner for the release (only for integration tests).
implementation "org.metafacture:metafacture-triples:${versions.metafacture}"
implementation "org.metafacture:metafacture-strings:${versions.metafacture}"
implementation "org.metafacture:metafacture-formatting:${versions.metafacture}"
implementation "org.metafacture:metafacture-monitoring:${versions.metafacture}"
implementation "org.metafacture:metafacture-csv:${versions.metafacture}"
implementation "org.metafacture:metafacture-yaml:${versions.metafacture}"
implementation "org.metafacture:metafacture-html:${versions.metafacture}"
}

application {
Expand Down

0 comments on commit 659a551

Please sign in to comment.