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
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 12, 2020. It is now read-only.
Are there any plans to change something on how the arguments are parsed.
If I see it correctly, the only reason the consumer of a generator written with this framework needs to put a nuget.config file in his project is because of how the arguments are parsed.
Looking at the repository, it does not seems like it will be out form beta (and on nuget) anytime soon.
I would like to have as less friction for the consumers of my libs as possible. Best case would be that only a nuget install is needed.
In my opinion the nuget.config could easily be avoided.
Forking System.CommandLine and using the fork (until the original is out on nuget)
Using a different command line parser (don't know what's out there)
writing an own parser
I think the first one would be a valid approach. Any thoughts on why this is a dumb idea?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
So it'll never move out of MyGet. It's the final sign that this repo need to either copy the code over (it's under MIT so no prob) or just use another library completely.
Are there any plans to change something on how the arguments are parsed.
If I see it correctly, the only reason the consumer of a generator written with this framework needs to put a
nuget.config
file in his project is because of how the arguments are parsed.Looking at the repository, it does not seems like it will be out form beta (and on nuget) anytime soon.
I would like to have as less friction for the consumers of my libs as possible. Best case would be that only a nuget install is needed.
In my opinion the
nuget.config
could easily be avoided.System.CommandLine
and using the fork (until the original is out on nuget)writing an own parserI think the first one would be a valid approach. Any thoughts on why this is a dumb idea?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: