Skip to content

Conversation

davehorner
Copy link
Contributor

…t selection

  • Handle project type detection after branch sync (Cargo.toml or CMakeLists.txt)
  • Prompt user to select target from cargo-e --json-all-targets if applicable
  • Run cargo-e or cmake based on detected configuration
  • Add activation banner and debug logs
  • Bump extension version to 0.0.6 and document vsce packaging requirement

@davehorner
Copy link
Contributor Author

It requires the https://crates.io/crates/cargo-e 0.2.41 for the new options.

I haven't yet actually done the whole multi-build across multiple machines yet. I assume I will need to tweak the websocket messaging. wanted to share this to discuss. cargo-e defaults to run and I would like to be able to run targets across the systems.

-s build is all we need to do to make it a build operation. Ok, now I'm off to play with this across machines...

@davehorner davehorner mentioned this pull request Jun 12, 2025
@nbolton
Copy link
Member

nbolton commented Jun 12, 2025

Thanks for the PR, I'm OOO for a few days, and I'll try to take a look early next week.

@davehorner
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ok, I have two machines and I sync from either and I would have expected the other to do the same sync and target. I guess I'm still uncertain on how the rooms are setup. NP. hopefully I will understand this better by then :)

@nbolton
Copy link
Member

nbolton commented Jun 12, 2025

I would have expected the other to do the same sync and target.
I guess I'm still uncertain on how the rooms are setup. NP. hopefully I will understand this better by then :)

You need to make sure the room ID is the same on both VS Code settings. If you don't have setting sync enabled then you'll have 2 different room IDs.

You also have to sign in with the same GitHub account on both computers as the room auth is based on the first computer that connects to the room.

Edit: Here's the source code for the server: https://github.com/symless/multi-build-server

@davehorner
Copy link
Contributor Author

are you opposed to having a room id prompt or generating the room name based on the package. Ive seen some things get synced that I didnt like and hesitate. but I will look into that.

@davehorner
Copy link
Contributor Author

davehorner commented Jun 12, 2025

I see so there is additional code and inter-dependency on this other server that runs...hmm. maybe a diagram and link to the build-server would be helpful to understand the context. thanks for the link I will look into it.

@nbolton
Copy link
Member

nbolton commented Jun 12, 2025

room id prompt

Sounds like a good idea, rather than just assuming that it should be a new room ID if there isn't one in settings.

BTW, you can see all the rooms on the server here: https://multi-build-server.symless.workers.dev/status

IDK if this being public is a security vulnerability, but I'm pretty sure it isn't since it's just a bunch of UUIDs. The undefined one is because if a bug (which I may have fixed, or there's a draft PR for it, can't rememver).

@davehorner
Copy link
Contributor Author

so I am sending data to that server when I use this? you donate the compute?

@nbolton
Copy link
Member

nbolton commented Jun 12, 2025

so I am sending data to that server when I use this? you donate the compute?

Sponsored by Synergy 😁

…t selection

- Handle project type detection after branch sync (Cargo.toml or CMakeLists.txt)
- Prompt user to select target from cargo-e --json-all-targets if applicable
- Run cargo-e or cmake based on detected configuration
- Add activation banner and debug logs
- Bump extension version to 0.0.6 and document vsce packaging requirement
@nbolton nbolton force-pushed the feature/cargo-e-support branch from 9030355 to 8d2d360 Compare June 14, 2025 10:22
@davehorner
Copy link
Contributor Author

I would look at #19 and not merge this one as it was not complete; I will try to get it mergable again or break it into separate PRs for update vs cargo-e

@nbolton nbolton marked this pull request as draft June 14, 2025 21:06
@nbolton
Copy link
Member

nbolton commented Jun 14, 2025

I would look at #19 and not merge this one as it was not complete; I will try to get it mergable again or break it into separate PRs for update vs cargo-e

Sure thing. Yeah breaking it into smaller PRs would be good if you have time.

Edit: Did you want to close this PR in favor of #19?

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