Define the portable application deployment adapter contract #328

Open
Open
Define the portable application deployment adapter contract#328

Description

@birkskyum
birkskyum
opened on Aug 25, 2026

Problem

The plugin-managed application mode can compose with provider Vite plugins, but the deployment-facing contract is currently spread across generated virtual modules, environment setup, build ordering, output directories, manifests, static output, and prerender behavior.

Provider integrations should not need to depend on undocumented implementation details to deploy a Solid application.

Proposed scope

Document and test the portable contract between @solidjs/vite-plugin and deployment adapters:

  • the production server service entry and Fetch handler shape
  • client and server environment names and required build ordering
  • client assets, manifests, and output locations
  • SSR, client-only, and server-function-only output differences
  • static shell and prerender output
  • which lifecycle steps the Solid plugin owns
  • which responsibilities remain with provider plugins

Where appropriate, expose named APIs or types instead of requiring adapters to import private virtual modules or reproduce internal assumptions.

Non-goals

  • implementing provider-specific deployment policy
  • replacing Cloudflare, Netlify, Nitro, or other Vite integrations
  • prescribing platform configuration

The goal is a stable composition boundary so provider plugins can remain thin adapters over a web-standard Solid application handler.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions

      , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all 
       blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '

      Skip to content
      Define the portable application deployment adapter contract #328
      Open
      Open
      Define the portable application deployment adapter contract#328
      Description
      @birkskyum
      birkskyum
      opened on Aug 25, 2026
      Problem
      The plugin-managed application mode can compose with provider Vite plugins, but the deployment-facing contract is currently spread across generated virtual modules, environment setup, build ordering, output directories, manifests, static output, and prerender behavior.
      Provider integrations should not need to depend on undocumented implementation details to deploy a Solid application.
      Proposed scope
      Document and test the portable contract between @solidjs/vite-plugin and deployment adapters:
      • the production server service entry and Fetch handler shape
      • client and server environment names and required build ordering
      • client assets, manifests, and output locations
      • SSR, client-only, and server-function-only output differences
      • static shell and prerender output
      • which lifecycle steps the Solid plugin owns
      • which responsibilities remain with provider plugins
      Where appropriate, expose named APIs or types instead of requiring adapters to import private virtual modules or reproduce internal assumptions.
      Non-goals
      • implementing provider-specific deployment policy
      • replacing Cloudflare, Netlify, Nitro, or other Vite integrations
      • prescribing platform configuration
      The goal is a stable composition boundary so provider plugins can remain thin adapters over a web-standard Solid application handler.
      Activity
      Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
      Metadata
      Metadata
      Assignees
      No one assigned
        Labels
        No labels
        No labels
        Type
        No type
        Projects
        No projects
          Milestone
          No milestone
          Relationships
          None yet
          Development
          No branches or pull requests
          Issue actions
          
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

          Skip to content
          Define the portable application deployment adapter contract #328
          Open
          Open
          Define the portable application deployment adapter contract#328
          Description
          @birkskyum
          birkskyum
          opened on Aug 25, 2026
          Problem
          The plugin-managed application mode can compose with provider Vite plugins, but the deployment-facing contract is currently spread across generated virtual modules, environment setup, build ordering, output directories, manifests, static output, and prerender behavior.
          Provider integrations should not need to depend on undocumented implementation details to deploy a Solid application.
          Proposed scope
          Document and test the portable contract between @solidjs/vite-plugin and deployment adapters:
          • the production server service entry and Fetch handler shape
          • client and server environment names and required build ordering
          • client assets, manifests, and output locations
          • SSR, client-only, and server-function-only output differences
          • static shell and prerender output
          • which lifecycle steps the Solid plugin owns
          • which responsibilities remain with provider plugins
          Where appropriate, expose named APIs or types instead of requiring adapters to import private virtual modules or reproduce internal assumptions.
          Non-goals
          • implementing provider-specific deployment policy
          • replacing Cloudflare, Netlify, Nitro, or other Vite integrations
          • prescribing platform configuration
          The goal is a stable composition boundary so provider plugins can remain thin adapters over a web-standard Solid application handler.
          Activity
          Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
          Metadata
          Metadata
          Assignees
          No one assigned
            Labels
            No labels
            No labels
            Type
            No type
            Projects
            No projects
              Milestone
              No milestone
              Relationships
              None yet
              Development
              No branches or pull requests
              Issue actions
              
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

              Skip to content
              Define the portable application deployment adapter contract #328
              Open
              Open
              Define the portable application deployment adapter contract#328
              Description
              @birkskyum
              birkskyum
              opened on Aug 25, 2026
              Problem
              The plugin-managed application mode can compose with provider Vite plugins, but the deployment-facing contract is currently spread across generated virtual modules, environment setup, build ordering, output directories, manifests, static output, and prerender behavior.
              Provider integrations should not need to depend on undocumented implementation details to deploy a Solid application.
              Proposed scope
              Document and test the portable contract between @solidjs/vite-plugin and deployment adapters:
              • the production server service entry and Fetch handler shape
              • client and server environment names and required build ordering
              • client assets, manifests, and output locations
              • SSR, client-only, and server-function-only output differences
              • static shell and prerender output
              • which lifecycle steps the Solid plugin owns
              • which responsibilities remain with provider plugins
              Where appropriate, expose named APIs or types instead of requiring adapters to import private virtual modules or reproduce internal assumptions.
              Non-goals
              • implementing provider-specific deployment policy
              • replacing Cloudflare, Netlify, Nitro, or other Vite integrations
              • prescribing platform configuration
              The goal is a stable composition boundary so provider plugins can remain thin adapters over a web-standard Solid application handler.
              Activity
              Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
              Metadata
              Metadata
              Assignees
              No one assigned
                Labels
                No labels
                No labels
                Type
                No type
                Projects
                No projects
                  Milestone
                  No milestone
                  Relationships
                  None yet
                  Development
                  No branches or pull requests
                  Issue actions
                  
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '

                  Skip to content
                  Define the portable application deployment adapter contract #328
                  Open
                  Open
                  Define the portable application deployment adapter contract#328
                  Description
                  @birkskyum
                  birkskyum
                  opened on Aug 25, 2026
                  Problem
                  The plugin-managed application mode can compose with provider Vite plugins, but the deployment-facing contract is currently spread across generated virtual modules, environment setup, build ordering, output directories, manifests, static output, and prerender behavior.
                  Provider integrations should not need to depend on undocumented implementation details to deploy a Solid application.
                  Proposed scope
                  Document and test the portable contract between @solidjs/vite-plugin and deployment adapters:
                  • the production server service entry and Fetch handler shape
                  • client and server environment names and required build ordering
                  • client assets, manifests, and output locations
                  • SSR, client-only, and server-function-only output differences
                  • static shell and prerender output
                  • which lifecycle steps the Solid plugin owns
                  • which responsibilities remain with provider plugins
                  Where appropriate, expose named APIs or types instead of requiring adapters to import private virtual modules or reproduce internal assumptions.
                  Non-goals
                  • implementing provider-specific deployment policy
                  • replacing Cloudflare, Netlify, Nitro, or other Vite integrations
                  • prescribing platform configuration
                  The goal is a stable composition boundary so provider plugins can remain thin adapters over a web-standard Solid application handler.
                  Activity
                  Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
                  Metadata
                  Metadata
                  Assignees
                  No one assigned
                    Labels
                    No labels
                    No labels
                    Type
                    No type
                    Projects
                    No projects
                      Milestone
                      No milestone
                      Relationships
                      None yet
                      Development
                      No branches or pull requests
                      Issue actions
                      
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

                      Skip to content
                      Define the portable application deployment adapter contract #328
                      Open
                      Open
                      Define the portable application deployment adapter contract#328
                      Description
                      @birkskyum
                      birkskyum
                      opened on Aug 25, 2026
                      Problem
                      The plugin-managed application mode can compose with provider Vite plugins, but the deployment-facing contract is currently spread across generated virtual modules, environment setup, build ordering, output directories, manifests, static output, and prerender behavior.
                      Provider integrations should not need to depend on undocumented implementation details to deploy a Solid application.
                      Proposed scope
                      Document and test the portable contract between @solidjs/vite-plugin and deployment adapters:
                      • the production server service entry and Fetch handler shape
                      • client and server environment names and required build ordering
                      • client assets, manifests, and output locations
                      • SSR, client-only, and server-function-only output differences
                      • static shell and prerender output
                      • which lifecycle steps the Solid plugin owns
                      • which responsibilities remain with provider plugins
                      Where appropriate, expose named APIs or types instead of requiring adapters to import private virtual modules or reproduce internal assumptions.
                      Non-goals
                      • implementing provider-specific deployment policy
                      • replacing Cloudflare, Netlify, Nitro, or other Vite integrations
                      • prescribing platform configuration
                      The goal is a stable composition boundary so provider plugins can remain thin adapters over a web-standard Solid application handler.
                      Activity
                      Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
                      Metadata
                      Metadata
                      Assignees
                      No one assigned
                        Labels
                        No labels
                        No labels
                        Type
                        No type
                        Projects
                        No projects
                          Milestone
                          No milestone
                          Relationships
                          None yet
                          Development
                          No branches or pull requests
                          Issue actions
                          
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

                          Skip to content
                          Define the portable application deployment adapter contract #328
                          Open
                          Open
                          Define the portable application deployment adapter contract#328
                          Description
                          @birkskyum
                          birkskyum
                          opened on Aug 25, 2026
                          Problem
                          The plugin-managed application mode can compose with provider Vite plugins, but the deployment-facing contract is currently spread across generated virtual modules, environment setup, build ordering, output directories, manifests, static output, and prerender behavior.
                          Provider integrations should not need to depend on undocumented implementation details to deploy a Solid application.
                          Proposed scope
                          Document and test the portable contract between @solidjs/vite-plugin and deployment adapters:
                          • the production server service entry and Fetch handler shape
                          • client and server environment names and required build ordering
                          • client assets, manifests, and output locations
                          • SSR, client-only, and server-function-only output differences
                          • static shell and prerender output
                          • which lifecycle steps the Solid plugin owns
                          • which responsibilities remain with provider plugins
                          Where appropriate, expose named APIs or types instead of requiring adapters to import private virtual modules or reproduce internal assumptions.
                          Non-goals
                          • implementing provider-specific deployment policy
                          • replacing Cloudflare, Netlify, Nitro, or other Vite integrations
                          • prescribing platform configuration
                          The goal is a stable composition boundary so provider plugins can remain thin adapters over a web-standard Solid application handler.
                          Activity
                          Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
                          Metadata
                          Metadata
                          Assignees
                          No one assigned
                            Labels
                            No labels
                            No labels
                            Type
                            No type
                            Projects
                            No projects
                              Milestone
                              No milestone
                              Relationships
                              None yet
                              Development
                              No branches or pull requests
                              Issue actions
                              
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();

                              Skip to content
                              Define the portable application deployment adapter contract #328
                              Open
                              Open
                              Define the portable application deployment adapter contract#328
                              Description
                              @birkskyum
                              birkskyum
                              opened on Aug 25, 2026
                              Problem
                              The plugin-managed application mode can compose with provider Vite plugins, but the deployment-facing contract is currently spread across generated virtual modules, environment setup, build ordering, output directories, manifests, static output, and prerender behavior.
                              Provider integrations should not need to depend on undocumented implementation details to deploy a Solid application.
                              Proposed scope
                              Document and test the portable contract between @solidjs/vite-plugin and deployment adapters:
                              • the production server service entry and Fetch handler shape
                              • client and server environment names and required build ordering
                              • client assets, manifests, and output locations
                              • SSR, client-only, and server-function-only output differences
                              • static shell and prerender output
                              • which lifecycle steps the Solid plugin owns
                              • which responsibilities remain with provider plugins
                              Where appropriate, expose named APIs or types instead of requiring adapters to import private virtual modules or reproduce internal assumptions.
                              Non-goals
                              • implementing provider-specific deployment policy
                              • replacing Cloudflare, Netlify, Nitro, or other Vite integrations
                              • prescribing platform configuration
                              The goal is a stable composition boundary so provider plugins can remain thin adapters over a web-standard Solid application handler.
                              Activity
                              Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
                              Metadata
                              Metadata
                              Assignees
                              No one assigned
                                Labels
                                No labels
                                No labels
                                Type
                                No type
                                Projects
                                No projects
                                  Milestone
                                  No milestone
                                  Relationships
                                  None yet
                                  Development
                                  No branches or pull requests
                                  Issue actions