-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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
Differentiate between top-level gems and transitive dependencies in report #11
Comments
I also like to update top-level stuff first. Some people probably prefer to update from the "bottom up", and a hierarchical report would help them also. Displaying a hierarchy is a bit tricky, because it's actually a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) not a tree. We could display a number like "Distance from Gemfile" in the report, where 0 is in the Gemfile, 1 is a direct child, and so on. Regardless of how it works, this should be off by default, enabled by a CLI flag. We want the default report to be as simple as possible. However, the focus of this library is measuring freshness, and this feature is getting away from that a bit. We could handle this in a different library, like I think our decision should be based on how much complexity this feature would add. |
I'll start playing around with a separate library and see what I can come up with. |
As a hack you can simply add the bundler option |
Some similar discussion is here singlebrook/bunup#11. |
This issue has been automatically marked as stale due to inactivity. |
When running
libyear-bundler
, the report can include gems that are not listed in my Gemfile. Those are the transitive dependencies of the top-level gems actually listed in my Gemfile. Often, the updates to those transitive dependencies are reflected in an update to the gemspec of the associated top-level gem, so an update to a top-level gem could allow bundler to resolve using the updated transitive dependency. It's tedious to try and update each gem listed, when an update to just the top-level gems would suffice. I'd like to see top-level gems listed separately (or hierarchically) so I can focus on updating them first.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: