-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
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
rfc: rough guidelines for cli plugins #92
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Let's ignore this for now (out of beta's scope) as the cli's `add | ||
ConnectorManifest` would also initialize the connector's config from the | ||
connector's default template. |
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.
This seems like it has the potential to duplicate functionality in the future... which path should the user follow, CLI's add ConnectorManifest
or this init
? When should the user choose one over the other?
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.
Maybe add ConnectorManifest
should be built on top of this (ie uses this to provide the init-ing)?
This could also be a totally different implementation. This is a convenience | ||
command for the CLI to use during `h3 dev` so that the CLI can invoke this once, | ||
and terminate it once the `dev` command has ended. | ||
|
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.
I'd like to better understand this.
The most naive, straightforward implementation is to literally run update
in a loop.
Given update
introspects the database, which may be intensive, this could get quite spammy.
Another option is to loop every X seconds.
A third is to only run the update when a file in the config directory is changed.
None of these seem satisfactory to me. In practice, the user is unlikely to be rapidly modifying their database,
so it's likely not necessary to run the update that often. Changes to the config directory probably don't mean the db has changed, so that option also does not make sense to me.
So, how should this be implemented? Again, happy to literally implement loop { update() }
as stated here but I really doubt we want that.
Rendered