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

Idea: Provide ownCloud-web specific type interfaces #8089

Closed
pascalwengerter opened this issue Dec 8, 2022 · 4 comments
Closed

Idea: Provide ownCloud-web specific type interfaces #8089

pascalwengerter opened this issue Dec 8, 2022 · 4 comments

Comments

@pascalwengerter
Copy link
Contributor

When working on the ownCloud codebase(s), I've often looked into the fixtures/mocks (which may soon get deleted in #8088) to figure out what properties the commonly used files/resources/shares (receiving, pending, outgoing, ...)/users/spaces/... have. Wouldn't it be, esp. in the recent shift to mainly working in TypeScript, useful to add an ownCloud directory to https://github.com/DefinitelyTyped/DefinitelyTyped/tree/master/types which would make those tyoes importable via @types/owncloud-web (or similar)?

@dschmidt
Copy link
Member

dschmidt commented Dec 8, 2022

Our internally used types should get better, yes.

Types especially useful for external devs are slowly moving to web-client and web-pkg, which we are going to publish as independent packages at some point (hopefully rather sooner than later).

So not sure what we would be publishing at DefinitelyTyped

@pascalwengerter
Copy link
Contributor Author

Up for discussion, feel free to close if you deem what exists in web-client/web-pkg is enough :) the nice thing about DefinitelyTyped is that publishing is being taken care of by them (plus it feels a bit more official I guess, but not necessary ofc)

@dschmidt
Copy link
Member

To me that's usually just a crutch if packages don't come with their own types. Always possible that types lag behind etc

@pascalwengerter
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've used some of the existing ones in a refactoring of #7991 now, closing this issue as not relevant (at least for now). Thanks!

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants