-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 344
Add .extensionKitExtension as the new PBXProductType
#691
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
Conversation
kwridan
left a comment
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.
Thanks for contributing this @mtj0928
For consistency other product types (e.g. appExtension), I was thinking perhaps .extensionKitExtension? I appreciate the repeat of "extension" word is a bit odd 😅
|
@all-contributors add @mtj0928 for code |
|
I've put up a pull request to add @mtj0928! 🎉 |
|
@kwridan I actually considered the name at first , but I also felt it was a bit odd. |
|
I vote to rename as |
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.
Thinking through it some more, the concern I had was around the possibility of there being extensionKit<SomethingElse> by the structure of the current product ID.
That said, we can start out with .extensionKit which is less odd, should any future products be added that extend this (e.g. .extensionKitHost) we could deprecate .extensionKit and re-introduce the specialised .extensionKitExtension.
So let's proceed with .extensionKit.
|
cc: @tuist/core - any preference to the naming convention - I could see either option working, consistency vs oddness 😅 |
|
Slightly in favor of |
|
I'm ok with merging this but I am also leaning to use the more consistent |
|
@mtj0928 can we trouble you to rename to The points raised by @fortmarek are valid, while the name is odd, it is consistent with other product types and the underlying Xcode types. |
kwridan
left a comment
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.
For visibility marking as request changes. thanks again!
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #691 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 84.93% 84.92% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 157 157
Lines 9098 9101 +3
==========================================
+ Hits 7727 7729 +2
- Misses 1371 1372 +1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
Thank you for your discussion, I renamed the new case and pushed the changes😄 |
kwridan
left a comment
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.
Thanks @mtj0928
.extensionKit as the new PBXProductType.extensionKitExtension as the new PBXProductType
|
Hello, @kwridan, when is it released as new version? |
|
Let's wait till #694 is merged then we can do a release with a few of the Xcode 14 related items within it. |
Resolves: #687
Short description 📝
From Xcode14 beta 1,
com.apple.product-type.extensionkit-extensionwas introduced as the new productType.The new productType is used for a new app extension like AppIntents Extension.
Solution 📦
Added
.extensionKitExtensionas the new case ofPBXProductTypein this PR, to support the new productType.Implementation 👩💻👨💻
.extensionKitExtensionas the new case ofPBXProductTypefileExtensionof.extensionKitExtension.extensionKitExtension