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

minor bower tweaks #3144

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Apr 13, 2013
Merged

minor bower tweaks #3144

merged 2 commits into from Apr 13, 2013

Conversation

minrk
Copy link
Member

@minrk minrk commented Apr 7, 2013

  • adds fab components to fetch static components
  • adds static/components to gitignore, so they don't get tracked

@Carreau
Copy link
Member

Carreau commented Apr 8, 2013

I want to ping @ellisonbg on this one as there are some component we do want to ship in the source tree to avoid yet-another-install-step. I think of codemirror, jquery taht can be install via bower.
We could make 2 dependencies folder, one in gitignore, not the other.

@minrk
Copy link
Member Author

minrk commented Apr 8, 2013

I think we want to ship just about everything in components, once we move to actually using bower, at which point gitignore should be changed. But right now, it's super annoying to have dozens of files that are supposed to be there that are not supposed to be tracked.

@ellisonbg
Copy link
Member

I think we should ship all of our components in the github repo (not as
submodules). The main reasons to use bower right now are:

  • Make it easier for us to track which versions are installed and update
    them.
  • Ease the job of packagers and people who want to use the IPython static
    resources in their own project

On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 1:23 AM, Min RK notifications@github.com wrote:

I think we want to ship just about everything in components, once we move
to actually using bower, at which point gitignore should be changed. But
right now, it's super annoying to have dozens of files that are supposed to
be there that are not supposed to be tracked.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/3144#issuecomment-16038131
.

Brian E. Granger
Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo
bgranger@calpoly.edu and ellisonbg@gmail.com

@ellisonbg
Copy link
Member

This PR is pretty simple and looks good. I am +1 for merging.

ellisonbg added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 13, 2013
@ellisonbg ellisonbg merged commit 7eac9ac into ipython:master Apr 13, 2013
@ellisonbg ellisonbg deleted the bower branch April 13, 2013 04:20
@ellisonbg ellisonbg restored the bower branch April 13, 2013 04:21
@minrk minrk deleted the bower branch March 31, 2014 23:36
mattvonrocketstein pushed a commit to mattvonrocketstein/ipython that referenced this pull request Nov 3, 2014
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants