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

Re-integrate server-pinger Scala/SBT project #417

Closed
ScalaWilliam opened this Issue Oct 17, 2017 · 6 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@ScalaWilliam
Owner

ScalaWilliam commented Oct 17, 2017

Rules: http://work.scalawilliam.com/rules/

--

As there's no benefit to having it as a separate library. Similar to #408 but a little simpler due to no subprojects to manage.

  • Git/SBT project: https://github.com/ActionFPS/server-pinger
    • Take SP repo and move its root contents into a sub-directory server-pinger.
    • Merge new SP repo into ActionFPS repo (this repo) using this technique https://stackoverflow.com/a/10548919 (but put into server-pinger directory).
    • Integrate SP's build.sbt into ActionFPS actionfps.sbt, excluding all the publishing features. No built.sbt should remain afterwards. Put dependencies into Dependencies.scala.
    • Remove reference to server-pinger in Dependencies.scala of the SBT build, instead referring to the local project
    • Make sure README.md is up to date.
    • I may have missed something else that needs to be removed, so scope may creep a little
  • Remove references from Docs: https://github.com/ActionFPS/ActionFPS-Book/blob/master/portal-development-guide.md

I'll pay $30 for this (ScalaWilliam Work).
Please post here "I'm taking on this" to lock the task to yourself.

@omainegra

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@omainegra

omainegra Oct 18, 2017

Contributor

I'm taking on this

Contributor

omainegra commented Oct 18, 2017

I'm taking on this

@ScalaWilliam

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ScalaWilliam

ScalaWilliam Oct 19, 2017

Owner

If two tasks are similar, I recommend starting on the next one only after first one is finished. I'll update that into the rules. I have some comments and questions

Owner

ScalaWilliam commented Oct 19, 2017

If two tasks are similar, I recommend starting on the next one only after first one is finished. I'll update that into the rules. I have some comments and questions

@ScalaWilliam

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ScalaWilliam

ScalaWilliam Oct 19, 2017

Owner

I think I need to not post a task until I'm 100% certain of the assumptions and lessons from the previous one too :-)

Owner

ScalaWilliam commented Oct 19, 2017

I think I need to not post a task until I'm 100% certain of the assumptions and lessons from the previous one too :-)

@ScalaWilliam

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ScalaWilliam

ScalaWilliam Nov 3, 2017

Owner

@omainegra 2 weeks, I'll introduce a new rule for a 2 week limit :-)
If you can't do this at this time please unassign yourself.

Owner

ScalaWilliam commented Nov 3, 2017

@omainegra 2 weeks, I'll introduce a new rule for a 2 week limit :-)
If you can't do this at this time please unassign yourself.

@omainegra

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@omainegra

omainegra Nov 3, 2017

Contributor

@ScalaWilliam Sorry about that, I sent you an email asking you when should I start, based in your previous comment (100% certain of the assumptions and lessons from the previous on).

Contributor

omainegra commented Nov 3, 2017

@ScalaWilliam Sorry about that, I sent you an email asking you when should I start, based in your previous comment (100% certain of the assumptions and lessons from the previous on).

@ScalaWilliam

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ScalaWilliam

ScalaWilliam Nov 3, 2017

Owner

Oh!

Sorry about that!

Yes, do do that, continue, based on the lessons in the previous issue :-)

Owner

ScalaWilliam commented Nov 3, 2017

Oh!

Sorry about that!

Yes, do do that, continue, based on the lessons in the previous issue :-)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment