Skip to content

Conversation

@askazakov
Copy link
Contributor

Created with brew bump-formula-pr.

Details

release notes
- Activate the hyperlink check whenever a modifier is changed (`alt` for windows/linux/bsd and `command` for macos).
- Fix Error when Double click on terminal side (Ref [#316](https://github.com/raphamorim/rio/issues/316)).

@github-actions github-actions bot added rust Rust use is a significant feature of the PR or issue bump-formula-pr PR was created using `brew bump-formula-pr` macos-only Formula depends on macOS labels Nov 8, 2023
@askazakov
Copy link
Contributor Author

askazakov commented Nov 8, 2023

@chenrui333 maybe you could help me – why there are both cask and formula (this repo) ?

@krehel
Copy link
Member

krehel commented Nov 8, 2023

Tagging @raphamorim - is there any difference between the binary distribution of rio in cask compared to the source built here in core? Not sure we need both.

Edit: Upstream shows macOS version as cask, not core.

I also built this locally from source, and it builds a GUI application. Unless there's some other differentiating feature, I think this shouldn't be in core

@chenrui333
Copy link
Member

one is app, one is cli? is there any big differences between the two?

@raphamorim
Copy link
Contributor

raphamorim commented Nov 8, 2023

one is app, one is CLI? is there any big differences between the two?

Yes, some people use Rio as CLI because they prefer that way or an automation tool (e.g: most of the maintainers use the CLI option). However rio as a GUI for MacOS at least is definitely the most used option so maybe the CLI option isn't that relevant(?)

@chenrui333
Copy link
Member

one is app, one is CLI? is there any big differences between the two?

Yes, some people use Rio as CLI because they prefer that way or an automation tool (e.g: most of the maintainers use the CLI option). However rio as a GUI for MacOS at least is definitely the most used option so maybe the CLI option isn't that relevant(?)

I am sorry I did not get it, as there are two options (CLI vs GUI), brew can ship both and users can choose what they prefer?

@raphamorim
Copy link
Contributor

I am sorry I did not get it, as there are two options (CLI vs GUI), brew can ship both and users can choose what they prefer?

Yes (if is ok of course)

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. To keep this pull request open, add a help wanted or in progress label.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale No recent activity label Nov 12, 2023
@chenrui333 chenrui333 added the pending-rust-update Blocked by `rust` upgrade PR label Nov 12, 2023
@chenrui333
Copy link
Member

since we have rust 1.73.0 upgrade blocking this PR, gonna close this for now.

@chenrui333 chenrui333 closed this Nov 12, 2023
@chenrui333
Copy link
Member

relates to #149754

@askazakov askazakov deleted the bump-rio-0.0.27 branch November 13, 2023 05:55
@chenrui333
Copy link
Member

oh shoot, the branch was deleted.

@chenrui333
Copy link
Member

I will followup with a new PR after merging rust 1.74.0, #154526

@chenrui333
Copy link
Member

#154803

@chenrui333 chenrui333 added superseded PR was replaced by another PR and removed pending-rust-update Blocked by `rust` upgrade PR labels Nov 19, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot added the outdated PR was locked due to age label Dec 20, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 20, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

bump-formula-pr PR was created using `brew bump-formula-pr` macos-only Formula depends on macOS outdated PR was locked due to age rust Rust use is a significant feature of the PR or issue stale No recent activity superseded PR was replaced by another PR

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants