On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 7:32 PM, Peter Donald <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > Another thing I noticed across a whole bunch of projects is that they > usually create a per project task off which they can hang all the code > generation tasks off. i.e. They add a task like "myproject:generate" > that does all the source generation required for the project. Mostly > this is so they can generate code and then do most of their > development out of an IDE. However I notice that when I look at mavens > lifecycle at [1] they actually include phases by the names > > * generate-sources: (Generate the main source code) > * generate-resources: (Generate the main resources) > * generate-test-sources: (Generate the test source code) > * generate-test-resources: (Generate the test resources) > > I was thinking about trying to incorporate something similar into > buildr. What do you think would be the best approach? > * Add one "generate" task > * Add the maven generate tasks > * Add both tasks and have the generate task have all the maven > generate taks as dependencies > > There would then be a process of updating all the addons to use this > new approach. > > Thoughts? > I think it's a good idea to standardize on the task(s) names. I would go with defining separate task names and associating them with their most relevant tasks e.g. "resources" depends on "generate-resources", "compile" depends on "generate-sources", etc. I'm not sure about the utility of the overall "generate" task but I guess we could add it as a dependency of "build". Whatever we opt for, we should update our basic dependency graph at https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BUILDR/12+Things+to+Know+About+Buildr . alex
