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 the possibility to host custom fields in the bower.json #51

Open
ivan-saorin opened this issue Jul 31, 2015 · 5 comments
Open

Add the possibility to host custom fields in the bower.json #51

ivan-saorin opened this issue Jul 31, 2015 · 5 comments

Comments

@ivan-saorin
Copy link

I would like to have the possibility to add custom fields in the bower.json. Maybe there could be a 'custom' key within the specification?

@ivan-saorin
Copy link
Author

Anyone?

@benschwarz
Copy link
Member

Do you have a use case for this @ivan-saorin?
Otherwise, I mean its JSON—do what you like.

If you're looking to create something as part of the spec, it'd be good to get a few examples of what you're trying to do here.

@ivan-saorin
Copy link
Author

The idea would be to provide project specific metadata without exit the specification. In my case I would like to add the link to the documentation of a project module: leaving the module author the freedom to point to whatever file she like.

@benschwarz
Copy link
Member

I'm rather surprised that we don't have a documentationUrl field or something already, but I'm somewhat unconvinced of this proposal.

If we could come up with a few examples then we could make a pitch for its inclusion to the spec, but right now I think there isn't enough here to move forward.

@ivan-saorin
Copy link
Author

Well, for my scopes a "documentationUrl" field would suffice. How about
adding that to the specs?

2015-08-21 10:08 GMT+02:00 Ben Schwarz notifications@github.com:

I'm rather surprised that we don't have a documentationUrl field or
something already, but I'm somewhat unconvinced of this proposal.

If we could come up with a few examples then we could make a pitch for its
inclusion to the spec, but right now I think there isn't enough here to
move forward.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#51 (comment)
.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants