4 ms·
I don't really understand why this is a new project. Seems it would have been pretty simple to add these in a backwards compatible way. It would only break in
by bluelightning2k 2y ago
I don't really understand why this is a new project. Seems it would have been pretty simple to add these in a backwards compatible way.
It would only break in cases where people's values specifically started with "encrypted:"
- daralthus 2y agoIt was added in a backwards compatible way, but the author decided to make a breaking change with this release. The previous (IMHO superior) version was generating a .env.vault and a .env.keys from a .env file. Leaving the .env plain text and .env.vault encrypted.
- bluelightning2k 2y agoMaybe the simple idea is to start a company. Nothing wrong with that. It's definitely what I would do. First envx then "envx vault"
- OJFord 2y agoEven without backwards compatibility, why not just a breaking change in the same project? Don't get it either. I've never used it (knowingly) but if I did and wanted to use this new version/project even the CLI name change to append 'x' would be annoying (I'd probably alias /symlink it).
- triyambakam 2y agoWhether good or bad, it's marketing