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

Add Pod lib command #850

Closed
fabiopelosin opened this issue Mar 12, 2013 · 5 comments
Closed

Add Pod lib command #850

fabiopelosin opened this issue Mar 12, 2013 · 5 comments
Labels
t1:enhancement Enhancements that have not been picked up yet. Please comment if you plan to work on it

Comments

@fabiopelosin
Copy link
Member

This command would have two subcommands:

$ pod lib create NAME

Creates a template for a new Pod. It could simply clone a repository (CocoaPods/template) which we would maintain. This repository could be opinionated and show the best practices for creating a library. For example it could have a rake task which would allow to release the new version of the pod.

The release task should:

  • take the new version as an argument
  • lint locally (lib lint)
  • update the version in the podspec
  • commit, tag and push the repo
  • lint the podspec (spec lint)
  • push the podspec
$ pod lib lint

Would replace pod spec lint --local which lints the specification using the files specified in the root of the current folder (ignoring the source of the podspec).


This feature is friendly to those who would like to foster their ruby skills so if somebody would like candidate to improve her/his Ruby-fu I'll be glad to help.

@alloy
Copy link
Member

alloy commented Mar 12, 2013

I prefer pod spec create NAME --lib or something along those lines. Creating the skeleton is an extra, we don’t do stuff with ‘libs’, we work with ‘specs’ instead, so the name should reflect that imo.

@fabiopelosin
Copy link
Member Author

I'm not sold on the lib name for the subcommand as well. However I think that we should namespace the commands which provide facilities for working with the source of Pod instead of with the spec.

Also it appears that the --local option is a bit too much hidden and some users commit, (even tag) and push to the repo simply to lint the podspec (see the above referenced issue).


On a related note should the naked pod command run pod install like bundler does?

@orta
Copy link
Member

orta commented Mar 12, 2013

re: naked pod - I think so. Most people will expect to put pod help or pod --help to get the help.

@alloy
Copy link
Member

alloy commented Mar 12, 2013

However I think that we should namespace the commands which provide facilities for working with the source of Pod instead of with the spec.

Also it appears that the --local option is a bit too much hidden and some users commit, (even tag) and push to the repo simply to lint the podspec (see the above referenced issue).

Fair enough, assuming there are at least two commands. (create & lint)

On a related note should the naked pod command run pod install like bundler does?

Interesting. I did not know Bundler did that :) I agree with what @orta said.

👍

@seivan
Copy link
Contributor

seivan commented Mar 13, 2013

👍 Local validation should be default.

fabiopelosin added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 18, 2013
Tests are still missing.
fabiopelosin added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 3, 2013
* lib-subcommand:
  Add Pod lib command #850
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
t1:enhancement Enhancements that have not been picked up yet. Please comment if you plan to work on it
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants