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

Add option "launch-startegy" #79

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Add option "launch-startegy" #79

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

ghost
Copy link

@ghost ghost commented Sep 22, 2017

This option offers the possibility to user
to call the entrypoint thanks to "/usr/bin/env nodejs"

BTW, it's maybe an alternative for the improvement #66

Sébastien Mennetrier added 2 commits September 22, 2017 10:36
This option offers the possibility to user
to call the entrypoint thanks to "/usr/bin/env nodejs"
In files :
  - sysv-init
  - systemd.service
  - upstrat.conf
@heartsucker
Copy link
Owner

This definitely solves the issue, but I think this one falls a bit too much into too much configurability. I think issuing a WARN on missing executable bit and missing shebang might be sufficient.

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Sep 28, 2017

I see, for me both are good solutions, even if I think that this option is a little more comfortable when devs (like me) use tools to generate .js file like closure compiler.

Anyway I'm OK if you prefer only display a WARN :-)

@heartsucker
Copy link
Owner

What you could do then is generate the JS files and have the entrypoint be your own shell script that's just:

#!/usr/bin/env node

/path/to/my/script.js "$@"

And that could be executable and shebang'd sufficienly. I know that takes some of the automagic away from the tool, but it might be enough. I mean, not that your PR isn't totally reasonable, but I'm just worried about the balance of the tool being general straight forward versus too configurable.

Also, there is an upper limit to how much can get packed into this before I'd just tell someone "you probably need to write your own packaging script because your use case is too complex."

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Oct 3, 2017

OK, no problem

@heartsucker
Copy link
Owner

Marking this as closed because it seems to be resolved.

@heartsucker heartsucker closed this Oct 5, 2017
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.

1 participant