Skip to content

Conversation

tboerger
Copy link
Member

@tboerger tboerger commented Nov 4, 2016

Fixes #30

Things left to do:

  • Integrate the switch for mailer templates
  • Make conf also aware of builtin or external

@lunny
Copy link
Member

lunny commented Nov 5, 2016

LGTM

@strk
Copy link
Member

strk commented Nov 5, 2016

Does public/ already support override via custom/public?
As I think I'm using public/img to store custom logo and favicon...

@thibaultmeyer
Copy link
Contributor

thibaultmeyer commented Nov 5, 2016

I think bindata.go dont have to be committed on repository and must be auto-generated during the make process.

It become a mess when two (or more) Pull Requests update different files (eg : app.ini for the first commit and add new files for the second) because the bindata.go file cause merge error each time.

@strk
Copy link
Member

strk commented Nov 5, 2016

I tend to agree with @0xBAADF00D but would rather avoid blocking this change due to that issue. Rather, I suggest a new issue is filed for the bindata.go threatment.

@tboerger
Copy link
Member Author

tboerger commented Nov 5, 2016

I'm currently thinking about rebuilding the bindata interface that handles static directories instead of embedding the data, switched via a build tag.

@tboerger tboerger added the type/enhancement An improvement of existing functionality label Nov 5, 2016
@tboerger tboerger added this to the 1.0.0 milestone Nov 5, 2016
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Nov 5, 2016

Current coverage is 2.18% (diff: 0.00%)

Merging #74 into master will not change coverage

@@            master       #74   diff @@
========================================
  Files           31        31          
  Lines         7508      7508          
  Methods          0         0          
  Messages         0         0          
  Branches         0         0          
========================================
  Hits           164       164          
  Misses        7327      7327          
  Partials        17        17          

Powered by Codecov. Last update 91b589f...b58e8fc

@bkcsoft bkcsoft added the pr/wip This PR is not ready for review label Nov 14, 2016
@andreynering
Copy link
Contributor

andreynering commented Nov 16, 2016

@tboerger I don't know if it helps you, but I like fileb0x because it prevents the need of two different tools: bindata and bindata-assetfs.

Also, bindata-assetfs has this bug on Windows.

@bkcsoft
Copy link
Member

bkcsoft commented Nov 28, 2016

@andreynering +1 on not using go-bindata-assets WRT elazarl/go-bindata-assetfs#34 (comment)

One of the reasons I'm not putting too much effort in this project, is
because there are better alternative available.

@tboerger tboerger added the lgtm/need 1 This PR needs approval from one additional maintainer to be merged. label Nov 28, 2016
@tboerger
Copy link
Member Author

fileb0x won't work because we rely on tags with the new bindata.

@bkcsoft
Copy link
Member

bkcsoft commented Nov 29, 2016

@tboerger
Copy link
Member Author

I will avaluate it with go.rice, looks like it also supports loading from a directory natively.

@andreynering
Copy link
Contributor

@tboerger

I will evaluate it with go.rice, looks like it also supports loading from a directory natively.

Like this? UnnoTed/fileb0x#3

Just trying to help, I'm fine with any option 👍

@tboerger
Copy link
Member Author

@andreynering currently we want to embed the data optionally via a build tag, bindata builds all assets into the binary while !bindata always reads the assets from the filesystem.

@andreynering
Copy link
Contributor

You're right, this would not be possible using fileb0x and build tags.

A workaroud would be having two fileb0x files ( fileb0x-debug.yml and fileb0x.yml) and two distinct commands on makefile to build with one or other option.

But if rice supports build tags, it would be way simpler.

@tboerger tboerger added the status/blocked This PR cannot be merged yet, i.e. because it depends on another unmerged PR label Nov 29, 2016
@tboerger
Copy link
Member Author

tboerger commented Dec 5, 2016

Obsolete via #354 #314 #293

@tboerger tboerger closed this Dec 5, 2016
@tboerger tboerger added issue/duplicate The issue has already been reported. and removed type/enhancement An improvement of existing functionality lgtm/need 1 This PR needs approval from one additional maintainer to be merged. status/blocked This PR cannot be merged yet, i.e. because it depends on another unmerged PR pr/wip This PR is not ready for review labels Dec 5, 2016
@tboerger tboerger removed this from the 1.0.0 milestone Dec 5, 2016
@tboerger tboerger deleted the bindata branch December 5, 2016 19:42
lunny pushed a commit to lunny/gitea that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2019
@go-gitea go-gitea locked and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 23, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
issue/duplicate The issue has already been reported.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Embed bindata optionally
7 participants