Mirrors/clap
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/clap-rs/clap synced 2024-12-15 07:12:32 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity
clap/clap_complete_fig/Cargo.toml

49 lines
1.5 KiB
TOML
Raw Normal View History

fix(complete): Give crates more specific names `clap_generate` originally intended to be "generate anything". With `fig`, we already broke one part out. With #3174's man support, we are also looking at keeping it separate: - More freedom to iterate on the API - Uniqueness (and potential weight) of its dependencies - man generation is normally more for distribution while completions are a mix of being distributed with the app or the app generating the completions (which will be exacerbated if we move most completion parsing logic to be in Rust) So `clap_generate` is having a lot more limited of a role than the original name conveys. I worry the generic name will be a hindrance to people discovering and using it (yes, documentation can help but there are limits). I hesitated because we are on the verge of releasing 3.0. However, doing it even later will be even more disruptive because more people will be using it (crates.io lists ~70 people using `clap_generate`). To ease things, we are still releasing `clap_generate` as a wrapper around `clap_complete`.
2021-12-31 17:59:15 +00:00
[package]
name = "clap_complete_fig"
chore: Release
2022-04-19 15:31:52 +00:00
version = "3.1.5"
fix(complete): Give crates more specific names `clap_generate` originally intended to be "generate anything". With `fig`, we already broke one part out. With #3174's man support, we are also looking at keeping it separate: - More freedom to iterate on the API - Uniqueness (and potential weight) of its dependencies - man generation is normally more for distribution while completions are a mix of being distributed with the app or the app generating the completions (which will be exacerbated if we move most completion parsing logic to be in Rust) So `clap_generate` is having a lot more limited of a role than the original name conveys. I worry the generic name will be a hindrance to people discovering and using it (yes, documentation can help but there are limits). I hesitated because we are on the verge of releasing 3.0. However, doing it even later will be even more disruptive because more people will be using it (crates.io lists ~70 people using `clap_generate`). To ease things, we are still releasing `clap_generate` as a wrapper around `clap_complete`.
2021-12-31 17:59:15 +00:00
description = "A generator library used with clap for Fig completion scripts"
repository = "https://github.com/clap-rs/clap/tree/master/clap_complete_fig"
documentation = "https://docs.rs/clap_complete_fig"
style: Normalize manifests
2022-05-18 15:33:37 +00:00
categories = ["command-line-interface"]
fix(complete): Give crates more specific names `clap_generate` originally intended to be "generate anything". With `fig`, we already broke one part out. With #3174's man support, we are also looking at keeping it separate: - More freedom to iterate on the API - Uniqueness (and potential weight) of its dependencies - man generation is normally more for distribution while completions are a mix of being distributed with the app or the app generating the completions (which will be exacerbated if we move most completion parsing logic to be in Rust) So `clap_generate` is having a lot more limited of a role than the original name conveys. I worry the generic name will be a hindrance to people discovering and using it (yes, documentation can help but there are limits). I hesitated because we are on the verge of releasing 3.0. However, doing it even later will be even more disruptive because more people will be using it (crates.io lists ~70 people using `clap_generate`). To ease things, we are still releasing `clap_generate` as a wrapper around `clap_complete`.
2021-12-31 17:59:15 +00:00
keywords = [
style: Normalize manifests
2022-05-18 15:33:37 +00:00
"clap",
"cli",
"completion",
"fig",
fix(complete): Give crates more specific names `clap_generate` originally intended to be "generate anything". With `fig`, we already broke one part out. With #3174's man support, we are also looking at keeping it separate: - More freedom to iterate on the API - Uniqueness (and potential weight) of its dependencies - man generation is normally more for distribution while completions are a mix of being distributed with the app or the app generating the completions (which will be exacerbated if we move most completion parsing logic to be in Rust) So `clap_generate` is having a lot more limited of a role than the original name conveys. I worry the generic name will be a hindrance to people discovering and using it (yes, documentation can help but there are limits). I hesitated because we are on the verge of releasing 3.0. However, doing it even later will be even more disruptive because more people will be using it (crates.io lists ~70 people using `clap_generate`). To ease things, we are still releasing `clap_generate` as a wrapper around `clap_complete`.
2021-12-31 17:59:15 +00:00
]
license = "MIT OR Apache-2.0"
readme = "README.md"
fix: Switch to 2021 edition
2022-05-18 15:35:30 +00:00
edition = "2021"
style: Normalize manifests
2022-05-18 15:33:37 +00:00
rust-version = "1.56.0" # MSRV
include = [
"build.rs",
"src/**/*",
"Cargo.toml",
"LICENSE*",
"README.md",
"benches/**/*",
"examples/**/*"
]
fix(complete): Give crates more specific names `clap_generate` originally intended to be "generate anything". With `fig`, we already broke one part out. With #3174's man support, we are also looking at keeping it separate: - More freedom to iterate on the API - Uniqueness (and potential weight) of its dependencies - man generation is normally more for distribution while completions are a mix of being distributed with the app or the app generating the completions (which will be exacerbated if we move most completion parsing logic to be in Rust) So `clap_generate` is having a lot more limited of a role than the original name conveys. I worry the generic name will be a hindrance to people discovering and using it (yes, documentation can help but there are limits). I hesitated because we are on the verge of releasing 3.0. However, doing it even later will be even more disruptive because more people will be using it (crates.io lists ~70 people using `clap_generate`). To ease things, we are still releasing `clap_generate` as a wrapper around `clap_complete`.
2021-12-31 17:59:15 +00:00
docs: Add completion changelogs
2022-01-12 17:04:57 +00:00
[package.metadata.docs.rs]
targets = ["x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu"]
[package.metadata.release]
pre-release-replacements = [
{file="CHANGELOG.md", search="Unreleased", replace="{{version}}", min=1},
{file="CHANGELOG.md", search="\\.\\.\\.HEAD", replace="...{{tag_name}}", exactly=1},
{file="CHANGELOG.md", search="ReleaseDate", replace="{{date}}", min=1},
{file="CHANGELOG.md", search="<!-- next-header -->", replace="<!-- next-header -->\n## [Unreleased] - ReleaseDate\n", exactly=1},
{file="CHANGELOG.md", search="<!-- next-url -->", replace="<!-- next-url -->\n[Unreleased]: https://github.com/clap-rs/clap/compare/{{tag_name}}...HEAD", exactly=1},
]
fix(complete): Give crates more specific names `clap_generate` originally intended to be "generate anything". With `fig`, we already broke one part out. With #3174's man support, we are also looking at keeping it separate: - More freedom to iterate on the API - Uniqueness (and potential weight) of its dependencies - man generation is normally more for distribution while completions are a mix of being distributed with the app or the app generating the completions (which will be exacerbated if we move most completion parsing logic to be in Rust) So `clap_generate` is having a lot more limited of a role than the original name conveys. I worry the generic name will be a hindrance to people discovering and using it (yes, documentation can help but there are limits). I hesitated because we are on the verge of releasing 3.0. However, doing it even later will be even more disruptive because more people will be using it (crates.io lists ~70 people using `clap_generate`). To ease things, we are still releasing `clap_generate` as a wrapper around `clap_complete`.
2021-12-31 17:59:15 +00:00
[lib]
bench = false
[dependencies]
chore: Release
2022-04-19 15:31:52 +00:00
clap = { path = "../", version = "3.1.10", default-features = false, features = ["std"] }
clap_complete = { path = "../clap_complete", version = "3.1.2" }
fix(complete): Give crates more specific names `clap_generate` originally intended to be "generate anything". With `fig`, we already broke one part out. With #3174's man support, we are also looking at keeping it separate: - More freedom to iterate on the API - Uniqueness (and potential weight) of its dependencies - man generation is normally more for distribution while completions are a mix of being distributed with the app or the app generating the completions (which will be exacerbated if we move most completion parsing logic to be in Rust) So `clap_generate` is having a lot more limited of a role than the original name conveys. I worry the generic name will be a hindrance to people discovering and using it (yes, documentation can help but there are limits). I hesitated because we are on the verge of releasing 3.0. However, doing it even later will be even more disruptive because more people will be using it (crates.io lists ~70 people using `clap_generate`). To ease things, we are still releasing `clap_generate` as a wrapper around `clap_complete`.
2021-12-31 17:59:15 +00:00
[dev-dependencies]
test(fig): Switch to snapshot testing
2022-03-07 20:08:56 +00:00
snapbox = { version = "0.2", features = ["diff"] }
Reference in a new issue Copy permalink