3 Replies
      Latest reply on Apr 29, 2019 5:22 PM by cwoolf
      bjtitus Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

        It looks like each Instruments Distribution Package can only have one Instrument Package file. Is there any way to split up code into multiple files (maybe an import function to use inside of the package) or bundle multiple Instruments Packages together? I'd like to have several instruments in one package but not have to have thousands of lines in my instrument package file.

        • Re: Splitting up instruments code
          cwoolf Apple Staff Apple Staff (40 points)

          There is nothing like that currently.  Which would you prefer?  A way to bundle several distribution packages or a way to have more than one .instrpkg in a single build?

            • Re: Splitting up instruments code
              bjtitus Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

              I think I would prefer to have more than one .instrpkg in a single build. When I first went looking for this I thought that I might be able to use something like <import-schema> from other files. Even something like that for importing schemas and instruments into a package node would be a nice addition.

                • Re: Splitting up instruments code
                  cwoolf Apple Staff Apple Staff (40 points)

                  We've developed about 20+ packages that make up the contents of Instruments, but we don't have same distribution problems because they all ship within the app, so it's not like we are asking our developers to install 20+ different files.  Personally, I'd like the ability to turn those 20+ packages into a single package just because it would improve the launch time of Instruments to only read 1 big distribution package rather than 20+ smaller ones.  That doesn't exist right now, but it's tempting. 

                   

                  Could you build a bunch of smaller packages and then link them together into a larger package?  In contrast, would including several sources into a single build step give you a distinct advantage over the proposed link step where serveral smaller packages could be combined into one for distribution?