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

suffix/postfix naming #8

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

orand
Copy link

@orand orand commented May 15, 2013

This adds suffix/postfix naming support as described in #2.

Note: to avoid breaking compatibility with yeoman/grunt-usemin, please do not accept this pull request until yeoman/grunt-usemin#113 has been merged into the v2.0 branch and the v2.0 branch has been merged into master.

tell Git to always use eol=lf so md5 file hashes of the unit test files are consistent across different OSs
(the international test was failing on Windows due to Git end-of-line differences)
@sleeper
Copy link

sleeper commented May 16, 2013

@CBas : we need to coordinate ;)

@necolas
Copy link

necolas commented May 16, 2013

Why is it necessary to wait on another task before this can be merged in?

@orand
Copy link
Author

orand commented May 16, 2013

This new naming scheme was designed to work together with usemin 2.0 which hasn't been released yet. Merging it now will break compatibility with usemin 1.x which is the currently released version.

@necolas
Copy link

necolas commented May 16, 2013

This task is also useful standalone and at the moment I have to point to a sha on the fork just to get this small change.

I'm not clear about how usemin 1.x would be affected by a separate task cutting a new release. It feels like that shouldn't be allowed to happen. Whatever is going on there, could that be fixed so as not to hold up change in this task while usemin is being rewritten? Thanks :)

@jfroom
Copy link

jfroom commented Aug 14, 2013

+1 looking forward to the merge

@sleeper
Copy link

sleeper commented Aug 14, 2013

@jfroom Done in grunt-filerev

@Ianfeather
Copy link

@CBas Is there any further reason this couldn't be merged?

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.

5 participants