Skip to content

add module for formatters and linters #6

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

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

nrdxp
Copy link
Contributor

@nrdxp nrdxp commented Aug 25, 2022

Since most of our projects use treefmt, it seems like a bit of an oversight that we don't include it in the devshell, at least optionally.

@nrdxp nrdxp requested a review from blaggacao August 25, 2022 21:52
@blaggacao
Copy link
Contributor

blaggacao commented Aug 25, 2022

This was actually removed on purpose to enable transition to nixago, see: IntersectMBO/cardano-world#36

The reason is that the two versions of e.g. treefmt might easily conflict.

It was just the latest commit which removed it for that purpose: 125b866

Would you still want to have a formatters capsule or would transition to nixago actually be beneficial and receive an additional impulse by the lack of a formatters capsule? (And via the context of this PR)

@nrdxp
Copy link
Contributor Author

nrdxp commented Aug 26, 2022

Well just in case this wasn't accepted, I went ahead and solved this another way for now:
https://github.com/input-output-hk/mamba-world/pull/839

@blaggacao
Copy link
Contributor

I'm still not sure on your preferences, here: is it for nixago or to get this PR merged as a bridge?

I'm fine with both, if you have a strong opinion.

@nrdxp
Copy link
Contributor Author

nrdxp commented Aug 26, 2022

I guess I'm just not seeing how the two conflict exactly...

@blaggacao
Copy link
Contributor

blaggacao commented Aug 26, 2022

Nixago should be the blessed path forward because its generalized capabilities.

So the question is if you would mind to switch right away or if you'd prefer to provide this temporary "work-around".

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants