Use electric-squirrel for electron 1.0.0+ support

[mitchhentges]

I forgot that for #193 I had manually changed electron-builder to work with electron@^1.0.0. This will use a compatible fork, because mongo doesn't want to merge a PR

[tomitm]

@mitchhentges Sounds like that PR got merged. Don't think this is still necessary, is it?

[tomitm]

Looks like GK is on the ball with #209 and #210. 😉

[mitchhentges]

I suppose that we can stick with the original electron-squirrel-startup, though my fork has less dependencies, and less useless code. I'd prefer to go with the fork, due to less complexity, but I won't be too distraught to go with electron-squirrel-startup instead

[tomitm]

It'd be best if you submitted a PR to get your changes in upstream, ideally.

Don't really see that much benefit to switching over to your fork, considering the big issue is fixed now and your changes are more of a nice to have sort of thing, which I don't think are worth having to maintain changes from upstream. 😕

Just trying to save the maintenance hassle here. If upstream was abandoned, like browser-launcher was, sure. But this appears to still be maintained, and I think you're better off contributing your improvements upstream.

[mitchhentges]

Sounds good
On May 22, 2016 11:42 PM, "Tomi" [email protected] wrote:

It'd be best if you submitted a PR to get your changes in upstream,
ideally.

Don't really see that much benefit to switching over to your fork,
considering the big issue is fixed now and your changes are more of a nice
to have sort of thing, which I don't think are worth having to maintain
changes from upstream. 😕

Just trying to save the maintenance hassle here. If upstream was
abandoned, like browser-launcher was, sure. But this appears to still be
maintained, and I think you're better off contributing your improvements
upstream.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#206 (comment)