Skip to content

Conversation

ZacSweers
Copy link

@ZacSweers ZacSweers commented Jan 17, 2020

Resolves #1652
Resolves #1619
Resolves #1248
Resolves #1489
Resolves #1444
Resolves #1313
Resolves #1264

Enables better support for newer androidx subprojects like #1271.

I understand there have been a number of prior discussions about next steps, namely this one. I worry that the argument that any move to androidx should either be completely split up artifacts or nothing has actively prevented progress on this front though, and think this is a positive first step. This unblocks that by making the initial move to androidx as a namespace, and then splitting up newer artifacts out of this (and progressively making dagger-android-support increasingly just a shim that delegates to them) is a possible healthy approach.

Also I believe the long term vision for dagger-android has changed significantly since those past discussions with the involvement of the androidx folks and the "Opinionated DI" talk from Android Dev Summit.

Resolves google#1652
Resolves google#1619
Resolves google#1248
Resolves google#1489
Resolves google#1444
Resolves google#1313
Resolves google#1264

Enables better support for newer androidx subprojects like google#1271, but I feel we need to start somewhere. This unblocks that by making the initial move to androidx as a namespace, and then splitting up newer artifacts out of this (and progressively making dagger-android-support increasingly just a shim that delegates to them) is a healthy approach.
@ZacSweers
Copy link
Author

CI failure seems unrelated still. Running bazel test --test_output errors //... locally all passes for me

@danysantiago
Copy link
Member

Closed by f45213e

@ZacSweers ZacSweers deleted the z/androidx branch January 29, 2020 23:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
3 participants