-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
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
Support additional repository types #169
base: 0.4.x
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Support additional repository types #169
Conversation
… '--force' option to harness download
…dle, rewrite tests
Thinking of it, the "repository" abstraction only makes sense for the original package management pulling from the JSON list... |
thanks, I wanted this. It seems cumbersome to manually manage the harnesses.json we publish, and make it easier to reference custom github harness layers. One thing that's stopped me from doing this so far was deciding how to handle the path detection, whether to have a rickety regex or use url schemes, like Also I was thinking about targeting specific release artifacts like |
|
@andytson-inviqa As of now, this is a bit of a POC, I opened the PR just to give some visibility on what I'm experimenting with. I decided to implement the easiest case, but it could be built on. We're technically already doing some rickety detection on package names 😬 but I agree, also it's currently quite heterogenuous. We could decide on a format - maybe requiring a scheme and fall back to packages when none is detected - and implement that through all sources. Extend the package type to actually hold some structured information, maybe introduce a short-/longform |
But if you're interested, I can continue this on the weekend, maybe do some refactoring to support this better. |
Adds support for
Also configures repositories via service config and fixes some pointless tests.
Still dirty and experimental, I feel package/layer management deserves a bit of refactoring to support multiple repo types.