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

[wip] refactoring to match current scarpe wv #5

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

gintama91
Copy link
Contributor

as noah seperated rendering logic , i thought it would be better if we refactor scarpe-wasm now , else if differences become more huge it makes it more hard in future to refactor things..

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
source "https://rubygems.org"

# Mandatory minimal gems for Scarpe-Wasm and for packaging
gem "scarpe-components", github: "scarpe-team/scarpe", glob: "scarpe-components/*.gemspec"
gem "lacci", github: "scarpe-team/scarpe", glob: "lacci/*.gemspec"
gem "scarpe-components", github: "scarpe-team/scarpe",branch:"main", glob: "scarpe-components/*.gemspec"
Copy link
Contributor Author

@gintama91 gintama91 Oct 10, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

just some thought came to mind but i think it would be nice to have branches as releases? like branch: 2.0-stable or something ?

-- in scarpe-team/scarpe

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We'll eventually want release branches, yeah. Right now, scarpe-wasm is really not mature enough for that yet...

@gintama91 gintama91 marked this pull request as draft October 10, 2023 07:52
@noahgibbs
Copy link
Collaborator

Nice! Yeah, this brings them into line much more closely :-)

@gintama91
Copy link
Contributor Author

closing in favour of #6

@gintama91 gintama91 closed this Oct 25, 2023
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.

2 participants