Switch lib description format from XML to JSON about haxelib HOT 9 CLOSED

How about: https://gist.github.com/TheHippo/5188116

Feel free to fork and edit.

from haxelib.

I forked and added dependencies to your example json. https://gist.github.com/MattTuttle/5189540

from haxelib.

I realised that I forgot the dependencies and updated my gist. I like my declaration better, because:

• it's shorter
• it's more semver-ish
• it's more like people are know it from npm (and other probably other package managers)

from haxelib.

That seems better so I updated my pull request to support that syntax and allow a wildcard (*) to be used.

from haxelib.

Nice work.

I'm happy with that format.
On Mar 19, 2013 2:49 AM, "Matt Tuttle" [email protected] wrote:

That seems better so I updated my pull request to support that syntax and
allow a wildcard (*) to be used.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/back2dos/haxelib/issues/1#issuecomment-15073862
.

from haxelib.

Minor issue I have, with dependancies, you use an asterisk for any version, but an x for subversions:
"other-project": "*" vs "specific-project": "1.2.x". Is there any reason we can't use an asterisk for subversion specifications too, like "specific-project": "1.2.*" or "specific-project": "1.*"

from haxelib.

I think the general idea here is to be compliant with npm's node-semver.

In all honesty, I think these add too much complexity, but more of that in the semver issue.

from haxelib.

@Dr-Emann: Yes @back2dos is right. The idea behind this was to be close the node package specs. It is proven to work and some people might already know how it works.

from haxelib.

@back2dos brought up a good point in the IRC chat, some of this stuff could definitely be moved out of the json. Contributors/User should be done via the web interface or command line, since it doesn't apply to the individual version. There's no reason to have to release a new version of a haxelib to add a contributor.

from haxelib.