feat(extensions.json): Boundary.baml-extension-preview should redirect to Boundary.baml-extension #810
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi there @sxlijin, and thanks for your contribution! The PR looks good and if you sign the Eclipse contributor agreement (link should be in the PR checks below), we should be good to go.
|
Did some force pushes to rewrite the PR metadata. Looks like it should be good now: It proved to be surprisingly confusing to find the ECA, since I never log in to the Eclipse website, and the "detail" link took me to a page where I was basically expecting a bright red button "click here to sign ECA" and instead got a page where the only CTA was "revalidate". Took me a few minutes to realize that "revalidate" was not signing the ECA, and that I needed to (1) sign the ECA (2) connect my GH account to my Eclipse acc and (3) then trigger revalidate. |
|
Happy it worked out for you in the end, @sxlijin. Let's ship this! |
…eview Boundary.baml-extension-preview still comes up in Cursor search results (which are backed by open vsx afaik) presumably because (1) the current name is "Baml (preview2)" and (2) some of the associated tags/categories say "baml" I'd like to temporarily restore baml-extension-preview so that we can publish a new version free of any metadata, essentially "nuking" it for any users coming to the extension, and then re-deprecate it. Let me know if this would work as intended. cc @filiptronicek as reviewer on EclipseFdn#810
2 participants
Per docs, I'm requesting a deprecation of https://open-vsx.org/extension/Boundary/baml-extension-preview.
Boundary.baml-extension-preview was published while doing some internal alpha testing of our open vsx release process, but because I chose such a similar name to our actual extension, Boundary.baml-extension, it looks like some of our users have landed on baml-extension-preview instead of baml-extension.
Deprecation seems like the correct way to handle this; please let me know if there's a more appropriate way to do so.