You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Would you be open to a PR that adds a setting to explicitly include dependencies?
Right now, I have to stIgnore every dependency that should not have a scalablytyped facade. But in order to keep the build.sbt more expressive, I would actually like to specify the packages that need a scalablytyped facade. Because otherwise I can only understand it together with the package.json.
It could look like this (open for other name suggestions):
If you only want to generate scalablytyped facedes for a few js depdendencies, you currently have to maintain an ignore list in the build.sbt file.
In order to make this more explicit and easier to maintain, this PR introduces a new option `stExplicitInclude`, which allows to explicitly select the libraries, you want to process. All others are automatically ignored.
Usage:
```
// is None per default
stExplicitInclude := Some(List("packageA", "packageB"))
```
fixesScalablyTyped#601
If you only want to generate ScalablyTyped facades for a few js dependencies, you currently have to maintain an ignore list in the build.sbt file.
In order to make this more explicit and easier to maintain, this PR introduces a new option `stExplicitInclude`, which allows to explicitly select the libraries, you want to process. All others are automatically ignored.
Usage:
```
// is None per default
stExplicitInclude := Some(List("packageA", "packageB"))
```
fixesScalablyTyped#601
Would you be open to a PR that adds a setting to explicitly include dependencies?
Right now, I have to
stIgnore
every dependency that should not have a scalablytyped facade. But in order to keep the build.sbt more expressive, I would actually like to specify the packages that need a scalablytyped facade. Because otherwise I can only understand it together with the package.json.It could look like this (open for other name suggestions):
There are a few cases to handle though:
stIgnore
andstIncludeExplicit
would not compose well and should not be used together.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: