I like Jons bicycle shed, it has a nice color... Cheers, Joern.
On 20.01.2011, at 15:54, Jon Cox wrote: > > > Here's how I'd paint the shed: > > > > First style: basic > Second style: derived > Third style: plugin-provided > > Cheers, > -Jon > > > * John Murph ([email protected]) [110119 14:02]: >> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Hans Dockter <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 8:56 PM, Peter Niederwieser >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Dump of my brainstorming session: >>>> >>>> First style: untyped, general-purpose, free-form, ad-hoc >>>> Second style: typed, special-purpose, specialized >>>> Third style: predefined, standard, default, implicit, plugin-provided >>>> >>> >>> I'm not sure whether I like the term untyped. In the courses I make a >>> strong point that all tasks have a type and thus an API. And that tasks >>> where you don't specify the type have a default type. Typed task do not need >>> necessarily be special purpose. People might introduce a non-default general >>> purpose task type with a property let's say called timer. >>> >>> I think the big difference is whether task types have a default action or >>> not. This is what makes them special purpose or general purpose. I like the >>> terminology special vs general purpose. >>> >>> For the third type I like the term standard tasks. It expresses the fact >>> that plugins can standardize the build for a certain domain aspect. It makes >>> it clearer to people that Gradle is also about standardization. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Hans >>> >>> >> Hey, bicycle shed colors, I can argue about this! (This comment references >> the idea that everyone is willing to argue about bicycle shed colors, >> because it doesn't really matter so there is no right or wrong answer.) >> >> Maybe the first style could be called "ad-hoc" tasks and the second style >> "customized template" tasks (I suggest "template task" as a simpler form). >> I guess the idea of special vs. general purpose would make these types seem >> opposite, when they are really orthogonal issues. What might we call this >> task: >> >> task myTask(type: SomeType) { >> someProp = 'value' >> } >> myTask.doLast { some more stuff } >> >> Is this a general purpose task with specialized parts? Or a template task >> with ad-hoc additions? Or a bad idea (although I've done this)? :) >> >> I agree with Hans for the third type, however. I like "standard" tasks. >> >> -- >> John Murph >> Automated Logic Research Team > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
