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
I'm experimenting with beak to automate some tasks and it's been a great experience so far. Thank you for creating this great tool! It's well documented and delivers what it promises.
Currently beak supports dependencies with // beak: {repo} {library} {library} ... @ {version} syntax. I'm wondering if this syntax / dependency handling could be enhanced to enable local package dependencies.
To me it feels like a single beak.swift file can become bloated if one wants to utilise this great tool for many tasks. In order to split some project specific solutions for different problems, I would love the ability for beak to include from a local package. This could follow SPM dependency format for local dependencies. E.g.:
I'm experimenting with beak to automate some tasks and it's been a great experience so far. Thank you for creating this great tool! It's well documented and delivers what it promises.
Currently beak supports dependencies with
// beak: {repo} {library} {library} ... @ {version}syntax. I'm wondering if this syntax / dependency handling could be enhanced to enable local package dependencies.To me it feels like a single beak.swift file can become bloated if one wants to utilise this great tool for many tasks. In order to split some project specific solutions for different problems, I would love the ability for beak to include from a local package. This could follow SPM dependency format for local dependencies. E.g.:
I don't know if this aligns with the philosophy of beak, but I think this could be very useful.