`ResourcesItem` specification might be incomplete
See original GitHub issueRelated to https://github.com/sbt/sbt/issues/6550 and https://github.com/sbt/sbt/pull/6552
According to the specification, the ResourcesItem
contains
export interface ResourcesItem {
target: BuildTargetIdentifier;
/** List of resource files. */
resources: Uri[];
}
I think this is incomplete because the build client might want to know for each resource URI if it is a file or a directory. In the case it is a file, it does not know the relative path of the file to be copied to the target directory.
@jastice Is this part already implemented in IntelliJ and how? Do you think it is worth improving this part of the spec?
As a comparison the content of a SourcesItem
is:
export interface SourcesItem {
target: BuildTargetIdentifer;
/** The text documents or and directories that belong to this build target. */
sources: SourceItem[];
/** The root directories from where source files should be relativized.
*
* Example: ["file://Users/name/dev/metals/src/main/scala"]
*/
roots?: Uri[];
}
export interface SourceItem {
/** Either a text document or a directory. A directory entry must end with a forward
* slash "/" and a directory entry implies that every nested text document within the
* directory belongs to this source item.
*/
uri: Uri;
/** Type of file of the source item, such as whether it is file or directory.
*/
kind: SourceItemKind;
/** Indicates if this source is automatically generated by the build and is not
* intended to be manually edited by the user. */
generated: Boolean;
}
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 2 years ago
- Comments:7 (6 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Dealing with bad/incomplete/unclear specifications? [duplicate]
More often than not, the business part of the specs are either incomplete or unaware of what can and can't be done (given...
Read more >What do you do when specifications are incomplete ... - Quora
Look deeper or re-frame your point of view, as it might be that specs are not missing, and your expectations are wrong. There...
Read more >[BUG] [Go] Incomplete generation for refs #2980 - GitHub
Description. I'm attempting to generate a client for a spec which includes complex references https://swagger.io/docs/specification/data-models ...
Read more >RD2.4: Errors Commonly Made in the Construction Documents
RD2.4: Errors Commonly Made in the Construction Documents · Closed Specifications. · Incomplete, Unclear, or Ambiguous Statements. · Inspection and "Approval" by ...
Read more >Resource provider registration errors - Azure - Microsoft Learn
Describes how to resolve Azure resource provider registration errors for resources deployed with a Bicep file or Azure Resource Manager ...
Read more >
Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free
Top Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Or we can mix the old spec with the new spec so that all the old and new clients/servers can talk to each other:
Well yes that should work but it would be better if made explicit in the data structure and specification of
ResourcesItem
.Also I think the client might need to know if a resource is generated or not for the same reason as a
SourceItem
:So I think it is worth aligning the
ResourceItems
structure and spec with the existingSourceItems
. It would look like this: