Skip to content

Conversation

@TWiStErRob
Copy link
Contributor

Also contains #62 (first 4 commits), because I based my work on that. Will rebase once that's merged.

@TWiStErRob
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cc @ronshapiro, curious if it's a good solution.
You can browse final code on twisterrob/dagger branch

@e5l e5l requested a review from cy6erGn0m March 11, 2020 07:29
@e5l e5l removed the request for review from cy6erGn0m October 23, 2025 07:49
@e5l e5l closed this Oct 23, 2025
@TWiStErRob
Copy link
Contributor Author

@e5l does closing it without a comment mean you don't want this, or you think it's stale? If it's the latter, you just merged the dependent PR after 5.5 years, so I'll need to revise this one on top.

@e5l
Copy link
Member

e5l commented Oct 24, 2025

Hey @TWiStErRob, sorry for closing this PR silently. It was almost 6 years after opening, and I thought it would be mean to ask about rebase. I will review the merged sample, update the dependencies, and address any issues that arise. I will be happy for any help :)

Thank you for your attention and contribution!

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants