Pitgull bootstrap cli

[majk-p]

No description provided.

[majk-p]

In ci.yml workflow plugin has generated: run: tar cf targets.tar target gitlab/target bootstrap/target core/target project/target while bootstrap/target is empty. I think we need a way to work around this as currently this breaks the pipeline.

@kubukoz any ideas? should we keep bootstrap/target empty in repo as a hack, or perhaps suggest changes to the plugin?

[kubukoz]

@majk-p

@kubukoz any ideas? should we keep bootstrap/target empty in repo as a hack, or perhaps suggest changes to the plugin?

I think both :) do the hack with .gitkeep for now, while we await the change in the plugin

[majk-p]

@majk-p

@kubukoz any ideas? should we keep bootstrap/target empty in repo as a hack, or perhaps suggest changes to the plugin?

I think both :) do the hack with .gitkeep for now, while we await the change in the plugin

Apparently there's a fix for that in the library. I didn't notice it at the first glance: sbt/sbt-github-actions#60 (comment)

[kubukoz]

this made me realize we should have a sub-package there. org.polyvariant.bootstrap or io.pg.bootstrap for consistency with the rest :)

[majk-p]

How about renaming this one to org.polyvariant.pitgull.bootstrap and creating ticket to repackage io.pg in main application to org.polyvariant.pitgull.app?

[kubukoz]

convince me why that's better and we can do it :D

[majk-p]

I think it's better because:

• We can avoid confusion - package name matches the organization name
• Someone else owns pg.io, and it's registered till 2027

Domain Name: PG.IO
Registry Domain ID: D503300000040413631-LRMS
...
Creation Date: 2003-09-22T14:07:39Z
Registry Expiry Date: 2027-04-30T12:00:00Z

I'd say let's leave the package name unchanged for now, and sort this out in separate PR.