-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
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
Don't include the transitive annotation dependency if it's not needed #328
Comments
The (even further) upstream issue is https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/KT-64109. Once this is fixed, we can |
Hm, based on https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/KT-64109#solution it seems like they only thing that is coming soon is improved messaging, not actually supporting |
Ah, interesting. I didn't read the full comment history since they decided to dupe my (older 😬) bug onto it: https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/KT-43500. I only was notified of the most recent comment and target version updates. That's... disappointing. |
Another issue with switching to compileOnly in the plugin. It won't be available to test sources, this may be what you want or it may not be what you want. |
We can add it to the associated compile-only configuration for tests, too! |
Is there anything wrong with Poko automatically using |
I believe I tried that and KGP won't let you. You can't make the common metadata target have different behavior across platform targets. |
Yeah, I get a circular task dependency if I try to do add it as
I'm inclined to agree with @evant's suggestion to require all consumers to declare the annotation dep (or their own), because neither default feels intuitive for all cases. |
Part of https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/KT-64109#update-the-warning-message now says:
Which sounds similar to what I suggested above. So maybe the 2.0.20-Beta1 target version will support this? |
This came out of the conversation started on saket/telephoto#79, on the jvm/android at least the annotations only need to be present at compile time, so it would be nice not to pull it in at runtime. I know there were previous issues with setting it to
compileOnly
before #163.One thought: have you considered having the consumer declare the dependency instead? I don't think it's too much to ask to do:
and it could be adjusted to whatever configuration is needed.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: