Skip to content
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

Move fhirig into it's own Go library #5

Open
bitwizeshift opened this issue Jun 16, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

Move fhirig into it's own Go library #5

bitwizeshift opened this issue Jun 16, 2024 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@bitwizeshift
Copy link
Member

The internal/fhirig package connects to the simplifier.net registry of FHIR packages and is able to download all dependencies recursively for a given IG definition. Currently this is used internally just so that we can fetch all definitional resources needed for generating bindings; but realistically there is no reason why this can't be shared across other tools, since it's functionality is logically independent and can be used in other things.

Ideally this should be in its own new Go library (perhaps a package, go-fhirig?). This ticket is to track this idea for the future.

Copy link

Hi, @bitwizeshift, thank you for opening an issue!

Since you're a first-time contributor to our organization, please make sure that you
have reviewed and are familiar with the following contributor documentation:

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask, and a human will
get back to you! 🙂

Otherwise, we'll prioritize this issue and get back to you when we can.

@bitwizeshift
Copy link
Member Author

Update: Several recent reworkings have introduced some of this functionality into exported sub-packages of this project (fhenix/registry) . I still haven't decided whether it belongs in a whole separate library, vs just as a reusable component from part of this library.

@bitwizeshift bitwizeshift self-assigned this Jul 14, 2024
@fhir-bellows
Copy link

fhir-bellows bot commented Oct 13, 2024

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has
not had any activity in 90 days, but we won't close it -- we don't
want to lose track of it!

If you have any updates or additional information to provide, please
comment and leave any updates on the issue.

@fhir-bellows fhir-bellows bot added the Stale label Oct 13, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant