-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.6k
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
Add pod update
command
#131
Comments
Sounds good. The Podfile.lock should already be valid YAML. |
+1 - been having to |
In the meantime, you don’t need to trash the complete Pods directory, just the one of the library you wish to update. |
What is the reason for exposing a new sub command? Wouldn't be possible for |
You wouldn't want For dependencies that you have specified without a version, or that use the HEAD of a git repository for instance, that dependency should remain locked at the version that was first installed (and as written to the Podfile.lock file). To bring these dependencies up to date, an explicit |
Now I see your point. So |
Moving this to 0.7. |
So this was talked about six months ago, is it not much of a priority? It's a very big deal to me because its an awful experience trying to develop a pod (or convert someone elses pod into a library) without this command. It gets so old deleting the directory in pods and using |
Regarding the conversion of someones library into a pod it is easier to use This feature certainly is a high priority, as were some of the features introduced recently. Unfortunately this one might be bit more complicated that what it seems, but hey I think that we need to start somewhere. Yesterday I was thinking about adding a half implemented version just to start going. In any case contributions are welcome :-)! |
See #131, #191. - The installer is initialized with a resolver. The resolver is responsible of indicating which specs must be installed/reinstalled. - It was introduced a slight change in the format of the Podfile.lock. - The specification set was simplified to receive and handle Pod::Dependency instead of Pod::Specification. With this change it also appears to be more robust. A this stage it appears to be working. However the support, for external and head dependencies is weak.
Sorry for bumping this, but what about |
@nickynick I agree that |
@irrationalfab Sure: #760 |
Thanks! |
Add WebContentView v1.0.4 by @nicklockwood.
Was this ever implemented ? |
See #131, #191. - The installer is initialized with a resolver. The resolver is responsible of indicating which specs must be installed/reinstalled. - It was introduced a slight change in the format of the Podfile.lock. - The specification set was simplified to receive and handle Pod::Dependency instead of Pod::Specification. With this change it also appears to be more robust. A this stage it appears to be working. However the support, for external and head dependencies is weak.
Refactor Linter Results to not use a mixin
Update integrations specs for lenient binary strip
I often find it would be useful to be able to update a single pod without having to blow away my entire Pods directory and re-running
pod install
.Some usage scenarios:
I want to be able to run
pod update [podname]
which cleans all artefacts and re-installs that pod.There would also be a
pod update
command which would update everything.With this in place, I'd like to see
pod install
only install new pods which should make the process of adding a pod and installing it much faster.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: