[Nitro] General inquiry about Reap

TRANS transfire at gmail.com
Tue Apr 25 14:33:45 EDT 2006


On 4/25/06, Jonas Pfenniger <zimba.tm at gmail.com> wrote:
> IMHO the ProjectInfo dependency is too tight for some problems. Rdoc
> generation (taking from your example), should also be callable
> outside of a project with custom attributes.
>
> ProjectInfo fits really well for common tasks like tests, doc
> generation, publishing. But refactoring or others should be callable
> with simple arguments. I think rake is superior in that because it
> provides more flexibility. If you can manage to do both then
> everybody should be happy. Isn't it ?

I may be able to work something in for that, but I wonder to what
extent it is really useful. You can change the rdoc 'options'
attribute in the ProjectInfo file to make it work basically any way
you could from the command line. So the difference is just being
callable from outside the project and with custom attributes passed on
the command line. Is that right? The former I don't know how that
could work  (can you even do that with Rake?) Won't you still have to
specify the project directory somehow, so isn't something like the
following essentially the same:

  cd myproject/path; reap rdoc; cd ../..

Even so I could of course add a flag for the project directory --and
see no reaosn not to. So I'll do that. Thanks!

As for the later parameters, I can see how that might be useful, but
only rarely. while there's surely some way to accept command line
parameters for it, I tend to think it would be easier just to edit the
ProjectInfo file.  Am I missing something in this respect? Perhaps
just being able to create variant specification in the ProjectInfo and
being able to call them by name would help?

Your and James' input is helping lots,
T.




More information about the Nitro-general mailing list