-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 302
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
chore(bld): migrate from rcedit with resedit #1094
chore(bld): migrate from rcedit with resedit #1094
Conversation
Thanks for this. I can see why you'd want to replace rcedit with resedit but doing so would introduce a breaking change to current developers workflow. I'd prefer if resedit methodology can be added alongside rcedit. After getting user feedback on both, we can assess if rcedit should be removed in v5. |
An option such as |
Why would an option be needed if no API changes were introduced?
вс, 19 мая 2024 г., 19:57 Ayushman Chhabra ***@***.***>:
… Thanks for this. I can see why you'd want to replace rcedit with resedit
but doing so would introduce a breaking change to current developers
workflow. I'd prefer if resedit methodology can be added alongside rcedit.
After getting user feedback on both, we can assess if rcedit should be
removed in v5.
An option such as options.resourceEditor which defaults to rcedit can be
added. Then developer has option to use resedit by explicitly setting this
option to resedit.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1094 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAYG7VLTOI2B27P256GFQA3ZDDKYFAVCNFSM6AAAAABH2GDJM2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDCMJZGI4TSNZZGQ>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
To toggle between using rcedit and resedit. |
Please explain the breaking changes here. There are no API changes and no new dependencies. |
The resedit package makes no claims of being a drop-in replacement for, or even having API parity with rcedit. It in fact does not even mention rcedit at all. So it would be safe to assume some form of breaking changes would be introduced.
Both rcedit and resedit are actively maintained and have had new releases in the past year (November and April). I agree with Ayush. Offering both as an option makes the most sense. Continue to default to what we have to avoid breaking changes. Re-evaluate when going to the next major in the library. I'd like to see a more comprehensive comparison of both technologies, what features they each have, if there are any features one has the other doesn't, are there granular controls that differ, etc (other than wine which is the obvious major difference). If we could completely replace rcedit, that would be cool, I am generally in favor of tools that are cross-platform by default and don't require the dev to jump through hoops like setting up wine, or using a separate Windows VM for builds. |
They don't — my PR handles these differences so the end product is the same. I use |
Sorry, misunderstood the PR. Went in depth into what resedit does/is capable of. Also went through the PR - no breaking changes. |
Co-authored-by: The Jared Wilcurt <TheJaredWilcurt@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: The Jared Wilcurt <TheJaredWilcurt@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: The Jared Wilcurt <TheJaredWilcurt@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: The Jared Wilcurt <TheJaredWilcurt@users.noreply.github.com>
16c35d5
to
a2f7cc6
Compare
Thank you for merging in the review changes and the PR — I was busy with my own projects and couldn't add changes in time. |
🤖 I have created a release *beep* *boop* --- ## [4.7.5](v4.7.4...v4.7.5) (2024-06-11) ### Bug Fixes * **run:** set stdio behaviour to inherit ([a3d181a](a3d181a)) ### Chores * **bld:** migrate from rcedit with resedit ([#1094](#1094)) ([03a55b9](03a55b9)) * **deps:** bump actions/checkout from 4.1.5 to 4.1.6 in /.github/workflows in the gha group ([#1095](#1095)) ([0f1b126](0f1b126)) * **deps:** bump google-github-actions/release-please-action from 4.1.0 to 4.1.1 in /.github/workflows in the gha group ([#1091](#1091)) ([316741b](316741b)) * **deps:** bump googleapis/release-please-action from 4.1.1 to 4.1.3 in /.github/workflows in the gha group ([#1114](#1114)) ([e284f5b](e284f5b)) * **deps:** bump the npm group across 1 directory with 3 updates ([#1112](#1112)) ([fde3491](fde3491)) * **deps:** bump the npm group across 1 directory with 6 updates ([#1105](#1105)) ([eb63ded](eb63ded)) * **deps:** upgrade to eslint v9 ([ffe6dd0](ffe6dd0)) * **docs:** add missing platform-specific app options info ([#1093](#1093)) ([715097f](715097f)) --- This PR was generated with [Release Please](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please). See [documentation](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please#release-please). Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
rcedit
dependency withresedit
Why?
rcedit
is quite an ancient package that requires Wine to do anything on Linux/MacOS, and having Wine as a dependency in Linux workers sucks!resedit
is instead a vanilla-node.js package that does not require building or external binaries.Replacing
rcedit
withresedit
allows cross-building Nw.js apps for Windows on mainstream Linux+Node.js container images. (Previously you would make your own to preinstall Wine.) And, of course, it makes nw-builder easier to use on Linux-based personal machines, too!