Chris de Graaf

Good point, I've only really used it in the base case then haha.

I'd argue that your preference is more niche than the proposed one 😅 I still don't know that I want either of these yet, just putting it up for consideration.

This has been thought about quite a bit e.g. #113 #79, mostly blocked by my overprotectiveness of the code at the time tbh. I'm not doing much maintenance on this...

Not a bad idea, but I wouldn't want to add an HTTP dependency just for it. Maybe if I ever get around to adding the other web-related stuff...

I think it could be modified pretty easily to allow this. The internal API would need to be changed a bit though. Currently, you could do something along these lines...

I'll note that having RegistryCI as a dependency of this package is rather unappealing... but I do like the idea.

IIRC that support is kind of broken in that it causes build errors instead of failures. @ararslan could you comment?

I'll leave it open, since otherwise I'll probably forget about it :upside_down_face:

It seems like something that can exist as a separate package. Why not have a go at a POC?

The point of a POC is that it doesn't need to be too polished so don't sweat it! 🙂