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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
New blog about how to create and publish packages #295
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
New blog about how to create and publish packages #295
Changes from 4 commits
fca1bf0
7bdd2db
ba52b20
e20fe8d
547cef0
13cba12
715a3fd
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would recommend against manually setting up a LF project/package.
And a single LF file does not classify as a package.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, I can add
(recommended)
next to Option 1, which involves using Lingo.That’s correct. In fact, there is already a link to the Glossary explaining what an LF file is. However, it serves as the starting point for creating a package, which should include additional elements (there is a definition for LF package too in the Glossary)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
remove 2.) VS Code is not needed for this.
Make people aware of
--platform
and--language
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What should I add about
--platform
and--language
here?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm confused about this.
--platform
and--language
are not documented anywhere that I could find. They are not accepted as command-line options tolingo
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is not clear to me what
main
should be for a library. Typically, a library will have multiple example programs illustrating the use of the library. What file should this point to?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the default workflow should be the folks publish to their own (public) repo. That will already allow for the exchange of reusable libraries. Then, later on in the description we could mention the
lf-pkgs
organization and getting people's repos transfered. I'm actually starting to doubt that this is the right approach at all. I think it might be better to have alf-lang/pkgs
repo with a single text file that lists all the repos. That would be super easy to build a little website around where people can search for packages (or a feature in VS Code, for that matter). In the near term, adding a package would just amount to adding the repo URL, and it would not require transferring ownership. Ownership transfer is tedious because anyone who transfers ownership would have to be a member of thelf-lang
organization, which has paid seats, so this won't scale. Perhaps this blog should just omit these details? Also tagging @tanneberger for feedback on this.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree with that, it will be easier to show the list of packages, and people in the community won’t need to ask to join the GitHub organization.
So, in this blog, I’ll leave out all the comments about the GitHub organization for now
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On reflection, if we do that route, we don't even need a separate organization. We could just have a
lf-lang/pkgs
repo.