Packaging an app about cargo-web HOT 5 CLOSED

I've just pushed an initial version of the cargo web deploy subcommand to the master. Right now it has a preset output path ($crate_root/target/deploy) and I haven't yet fully tested it out yet, but you can check it out if you want. (How it works is still subject to change, so if you have any wishes or suggestions regarding that I'm all ears.)

from cargo-web.

Definitely! I also think this is where we could put stuff like minification, amalgamation of third party libraries, SASS to CSS preprocessing, etc. But what would a deployable package be, I wonder? It seems to me that it would definitely make sense to support a "copy everything into a directory I give you" mode and maybe a "pack everything into a .tgz so that I can copy it over easily".

As far as naming goes I kinda like cargo-web deploy as, unlike cargo-web package, it doesn't suggest that a package (as in - a .tgz or something) is going to be built and it doesn't require fiddling around with extra arguments.

Should be simple enough to support the initial "copy into a directory" use case; the only other issue is - to which directory we deploy by default? From every possibility I can think of I like ./target/static the most - it's in target, so it will be in people's .gitignore already, and the name static is consistent with the static we might have in the root of the crate, suggesting a close correlation between the two.

from cargo-web.

I can definitely see how this fits into a bigger pre-processing pipeline. I look forward to it.

1. cargo-web deploy first sounded like the kind of command that will deploy an app to GH Pages or S3 or somewhere of my choosing, but your concern about cargo-web package is also valid. Perhaps "deploy to a path" and "deploy to a remote location" are conceptually similar enough.

2. yeah, i chose target/static to fit into the scheme you already had started. I do wonder if target/asmjs-unknown-emscripten/release/static would be better. It's certainly not as pretty, but it works for debug vs release artifacts and asmjs vs wasm once you start supporting that. Of course, it still remains to be seen how you distinguishing building asm.js vs wasm. :-)

from cargo-web.

I'm trying to write a Chrome extension using cargo-web + stdweb, and right now I have to run cargo web build and then manually copy-paste the generated .js + .wasm files into another folder.

So it would definitely help me out if cargo-web could handle all of that for me with a single command. I'm willing to send a pull request implementing this, though I might need some pointers if I run into any trouble.

P.S. My suggestion would be to use the name cargo web bundle or cargo web release, but I'm not too attached to any particular name.

from cargo-web.

Just published a new version which has an initial version of this added, so closing!

from cargo-web.