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

Replace lockfile format with JSON? #53

Closed
isaacabraham opened this issue Sep 4, 2014 · 9 comments
Closed

Replace lockfile format with JSON? #53

isaacabraham opened this issue Sep 4, 2014 · 9 comments
Labels

Comments

@isaacabraham
Copy link
Contributor

We can simplify the code for reading and writing of the lockfile if we create a lockfile record and just use Newtonsoft JSON to handle the serialization (since v6 it has native support for F#).

@forki
Copy link
Member

forki commented Sep 4, 2014

actually I'm very happy with format. It's exactly the same as bundler

@forki
Copy link
Member

forki commented Sep 4, 2014

/cc @agross

@forki forki added the question label Sep 4, 2014
@agross
Copy link
Contributor

agross commented Sep 4, 2014

I have to admit I like the readability of the current format. Simple, no distractions like braces to satisfy a tool.

Alex

Alexander Groß
Tiny phone, tiny mail

On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Steffen Forkmann notifications@github.com
wrote:

/cc @agross

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#53 (comment)

@isaacabraham
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yeah, true - my thinking is more around whether this is file designed to be read / written by people first and foremost (as is the case with the packages.fsx) or by Paket.exe? If the former - definitely makes sense to keep as is. If the latter - maybe not.

@forki
Copy link
Member

forki commented Sep 4, 2014

It's meant to be read by people. You will always cross check before commit.
On Sep 4, 2014 7:32 PM, "Isaac Abraham" notifications@github.com wrote:

Yeah, true - my thinking is more around whether this is file designed to
be read / written by people first and foremost (as is the case with the
packages.fsx) or by Paket.exe? If the former - definitely makes sense to
keep as is. If the latter - maybe not.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#53 (comment).

@agross
Copy link
Contributor

agross commented Sep 4, 2014

👍, I read it all the time to reason about paket's computation results.

@isaacabraham
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing :-)

@isaacabraham
Copy link
Contributor Author

@forki Question - if the whole point of paket is to abstract users away from uber dependency chains - why would you cross check before commit?

@forki
Copy link
Member

forki commented Sep 4, 2014

We want to make it super clear for the user to see what happens in his
solution.
We don't want to free him from dependency management.
On Sep 4, 2014 7:53 PM, "Isaac Abraham" notifications@github.com wrote:

@forki https://github.com/forki Question - if the whole point of packet
is to abstract users away from uber dependency chains - why would you cross
check before commit?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#53 (comment).

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants