Skip to content
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

Restore ember-try configuration for Ember Data #201

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 10, 2017
Merged

Conversation

backspace
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks to @jlami for pointing out that I mistakenly deleted this.

I haven’t run the tests locally, I wouldn’t be surprised if this still needs some tweaking. We’ll see!

@backspace backspace requested review from broerse and jlami November 10, 2017 17:08
@backspace
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The blueprint has both ember-release and ember-default, maybe this is overkill for us 🤔

@broerse
Copy link
Collaborator

broerse commented Nov 10, 2017

We will go with it for now. Thanks!

@broerse broerse merged commit 97cc46d into master Nov 10, 2017
@jlami
Copy link
Collaborator

jlami commented Nov 10, 2017

This looks much better! Thanks for your work @backspace

The only thing I can see is that the 'canary' scenario is failing in travis. Npm does not have a 'canary' tag for ember-data, so travis is failing on the npm install. Maybe we could use the bower way there? But https://github.com/components/ember-data is also in a confusing state and does not have a canary tag/branch as far as I can see. So maybe just use the beta there?

components/ember-data#38 (comment) seems to indicate that we could use the github master branch? But I always thought that github could not be used directly, since the publish step would generate the distribution packages. But maybe this is only for ember-source as ember-data is a 'normal' addon?

ember-default should be the one we have setup while developing, while the ember-release could easily change to 2.17 in the coming days. So I think it is good to have them both.

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.

3 participants