forked from shadowfacts/shadowfacts.net
14 lines
1.3 KiB
Markdown
14 lines
1.3 KiB
Markdown
|
```
|
||
|
|
metadata.title = "Update: Swift Packages and Frameworks"
|
||
|
|
metadata.tags = ["swift"]
|
||
|
|
metadata.date = "2022-04-07 22:36:42 -0400"
|
||
|
|
metadata.shortDesc = ""
|
||
|
|
metadata.slug = "swift-package-framework-update"
|
||
|
|
```
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
A while ago I [wrote](/2022/swift-package-framework/) about some trouble I had getting Xcode to cooperate with my efforts to bring my app file size back under control after adding a new Swift Package dependency. Well, I'm happy to say I finally have: the most recent TestFlight build of Tusker has a 6.7MB install size, down from 25MB.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Ultimately I did take the route of turning my framework into a Swift Package. I revisited it because I noticed in another project that local packages inside the same folder as the main project worked perfectly fine. The only difference I found was that the project where it worked used only an `.xcodeproj`, whereas Tusker used an `.xcworkspace`. So, I deleted the (for unrelated reasons, no longer necessary) workspace and found that, after quitting and relaunching Xcode, the local package worked perfectly fine.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
I briefly started writing a feedback report, but upon further testing I found that xcworkspaces in general weren't the problem—a new project and workspace worked fine. So, I gave up trying to reproduce it and assumed there was just something weird about the 3.5 year old workspace.
|