[9.x] Allow for the collection of stubs to be published #45653
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ollieread
changed the title
GrahamCampbell
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR adds a
CollectStubsForPublishingevent that is fired during thestub:publishartisan command, with the express purpose of collecting stubs to be published.The idea is that rather than rely on different tags in
vendor:publish, third-party packages can queue up stubs for publishing during the command designed for such.This current solution is the simplest, as I originally wanted to create a simple "StubManager" class to handle it, and have that work as part of the service provider. This solution also allows for the overriding of default stubs, but I can amend that if necessary. My specific use case for this would actually require overriding some of the default ones.
If you're open to a more advanced version of this, I would happily replace this functionality with a method on the base
ServiceProviderif that would be preferable.