-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
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
Update project strcuture publish #29
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
thisAAY
commented
Oct 11, 2024
- Updated the publishing setup
- Updated Gradle from 4.9 to 8.9
- Updated JDK from 7 to 17
- Updated kotlin from 1.3.72 to 2.0.20
- Updated Deps
- Migrated to Version Catalog
- Refactored to multi-module setup to include the library and samples, Instead of having two different projects
Quality Gate failedFailed conditions See analysis details on SonarCloud Catch issues before they fail your Quality Gate with our IDE extension SonarLint |
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.
Kudos for big upgrades 👏
Let's make sure at least bitrise passes. As for sonar error I would put them into "would be nice to fix but not blocker" category. Since they are not new, Sonar scan on repo is new
publish.properties | ||
*.gpg |
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.
👍
developers { | ||
developers { | ||
developer { | ||
id.set("antunflas") | ||
name.set("Antun Flaš") | ||
email.set("[email protected]") | ||
} | ||
} | ||
developer { | ||
id = 'thisAAY' | ||
name = 'Ahmed Ali' | ||
email = '[email protected]' | ||
} | ||
} |
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's not really a blocker or big thing. But we should replace personal info with company's info.
organization {
name = 'Infinum Inc.'
url = 'https://infinum.com'
}
developers {
developer {
id = 'Infinum'
name = 'Infinum Inc.'
url = 'https://infinum.com'
}
}
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.
Should we do this for all libs? because i think this is the same setup for JsonApiX too
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, but it is not big priority, you can fix it on JsonApiX when you will do some work there
version = "$versions.retromock" | ||
|
||
artifact sourceJar | ||
artifact javadocJar | ||
|
||
pom { | ||
name.set("Retromock") |
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.
Can't we just apply project level publish file?
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.
Just for feature reasons, in case we have different modules that can be published, so I just went with our current setup
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.
This file should not be pushed to remote
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.
Same here, just remove it from the project, but history can stay as is 🤷
|
||
username: findProperty("sonatypeUsername")?.toString() | ||
?: properties["sonatype.user"] | ||
?: System.getenv("SONATYPE_USERNAME"), |
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.
Btw, I have these env variables defined and I avoid using publish.properties, because it works on all projects automatically, and don't have to think about updating gitignore
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 would suggest removing this line from every library and the template if it exists there, so we don't encourage using a file that can be easily pushed to gitignore
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.
cc @KCeh, let's plan to remove publish.properties from the library projects then.
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 will recheck all libs, in library template there is no such file
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 sorry, I didn't mean to check if there is a file. I suggested removing the usage of the properties file in this file.
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.
This can also be in gitignore, right?
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 will update gitinore again, and force some updates in the history of this branch
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.
This shouldn't be harmful, so we can leave it in history.
@@ -30,7 +30,6 @@ afterEvaluate { | |||
version = "$versions.retromock" | |||
|
|||
artifact sourceJar | |||
artifact javadocJar |
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.
Is the doc automatically added?
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.
Looks good! I'll re-review after you address the comments.