add spread({ source, target }) about patronum HOT 6 CLOSED

Don't change current signatures, please!

from patronum.

@doasync What the decision?

from patronum.

There are still discussions... Maybe it should be used as a separate step (with source + targets) and not return source at all (it may be confusing for some users). I admit that it's convenient for using as a target in sample, but not sure if it's a good practice. Maybe it should be integrated into sample as a part of its functionality.

Let's just leave its current implementation untouched! There are not enough arguments (nor any requests from community) to change its signature for config instead of targets... and the worst part is, it's a breaking change. From a practical standpoint, the current one is better.

from patronum.

@doasync But current implementation will change in #45 . Maybe add support for { source, target } ?

from patronum.

@sergeysova I think, we should add a deprecation warning for spread(targets) signature first, and/or introduce this change in major version. spread(source, targets) can cover all needs for now

from patronum.

@doasync We can deprecate it in 0.14.x branch and latest npm-tag.

But in master branch, 0.100+ version, and next npm version release it without previous form.

from patronum.