Skip to content

create a separate go module for the site builder #869

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

Closed
wants to merge 0 commits into from

Conversation

dkotik
Copy link
Contributor

@dkotik dkotik commented Apr 28, 2025

Completes pull request #826 by removing unnecessary dependencies for
optional template engines.

The module was named sitebuilder instead of site because the latter
creates an ambigous import. It can be fixed later, after the SDK import
is bumped to the latest version.

@bencroker bencroker added the sdk SDK related issues label Apr 29, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@delaneyj delaneyj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Awesome! Thanks!

@bencroker
Copy link
Collaborator

@dkotik can you please look into why tests are no longer running?

FAIL	github.com/starfederation/datastar/sitebuilder/smoketests [setup failed]

@dkotik
Copy link
Contributor Author

dkotik commented Apr 29, 2025

@dkotik can you please look into why tests are no longer running?

FAIL	github.com/starfederation/datastar/sitebuilder/smoketests [setup failed]

Dear @bencroker, I did when I submitted this PR. I got stuck a bit. This was my fix attempt: 56dfbd5

I am not familiar enough with how the site builder runs to figure out what is wrong with the smoketests. I can try again, perhaps later. @delaneyj could you perhaps assist?

@bencroker
Copy link
Collaborator

Please update or close this based on #871.

@dkotik
Copy link
Contributor Author

dkotik commented Apr 30, 2025

Will get it done tonight by creating a new go.mod file within the #871 new directory.

@dkotik
Copy link
Contributor Author

dkotik commented Apr 30, 2025

Continued here: #874 <- this way is better when what I was doing above.

@dkotik dkotik mentioned this pull request Apr 30, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
sdk SDK related issues
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants