I'd say it's slightly different in a parallel build where I'm fine if unit tests run in parallel with functional tests.
Cheers! On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Luke Daley <luke.da...@gradle.biz> wrote: > > > On 18/03/2013, at 9:27, Szczepan Faber <szczepan.fa...@gradleware.com> > wrote: > > I'm wondering if it is the right time to start dogfooding this feature. > For example, we could somewhat model the fast checks ordered before the > slow checks. However, mustRunAfter does not quite fit this use case. > > > Isn't this exactly what we want to run unit tests before functional tests? > > > Cheers! > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Luke Daley <luke.da...@gradle.biz> wrote: > >> >> >> On 17/03/2013, at 23:11, Szczepan Faber <szczepan.fa...@gradleware.com> >> wrote: >> >> I'm wondering if there's a better name for the 'mustRunAfter' api method. >> 'mustRunAfter' somewhat communicates that the source task will be scheduled >> automatically if the target task is selected. I realise that there might >> not be anything better. I was thinking about something like >> task.orderingRules.after(someOtherTask) or task.orderedAfter(someOtherTask). >> >> >> This is a good point. >> >> It's reasonable to think that a user would interpret mustRunAfter in this >> way. Given that this would mean that mustRunAfter is the same as dependsOn >> though, maybe that's enough of a hint that it has different semantics. >> >> I quite like the idea of adding an interim DSL here too… >> >> order.mustBeAfter x >> order.shouldBeAfter x >> >> Given that the task namespace is a user namespace, we should be >> conservative about using it. >> >> The 'order' object could also be queryable for ordering rules. >> >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Adam Murdoch < >> adam.murd...@gradleware.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 18/03/2013, at 7:33 AM, Marcin Erdmann <marcin.erdm...@proxerd.pl> >>> wrote: >>> >>> As the code has now made it into master shouldn't this issue be marked >>> as resolved? >>> >>> >>> Not quite yet, as there are a few other use cases bundled up in that >>> issue. I guess the right thing to do would be to add new issues for the use >>> cases we haven't fixed yet and close the issue. >>> >>> >>> On 07/03/13 09:29, Taytay wrote: >>> >>> As someone who has been following this bug >>> <http://issues.gradle.org/browse/GRADLE-427> closely for a while, let >>> me >>> take a moment to thank you for the work you've done here erdi! >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://gradle.1045684.n5.nabble.com/Must-run-after-ordering-tp5710924p5710986.html >>> Sent from the gradle-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Adam Murdoch >>> Gradle Co-founder >>> http://www.gradle.org >>> VP of Engineering, Gradleware Inc. - Gradle Training, Support, Consulting >>> http://www.gradleware.com >>> >>> Join us at the Gradle Summit 2013, June 13th and 14th in Santa Clara, >>> CA: http://www.gradlesummit.com >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Szczepan Faber >> Principal engineer@gradleware; Lead@mockito >> Join me at the Gradle Summit 2013, June 13th and 14th in Santa Clara, CA: >> http://www.gradlesummit.com >> >> > > > -- > Szczepan Faber > Principal engineer@gradleware; Lead@mockito > Join me at the Gradle Summit 2013, June 13th and 14th in Santa Clara, CA: > http://www.gradlesummit.com > > -- Szczepan Faber Principal engineer@gradleware; Lead@mockito Join me at the Gradle Summit 2013, June 13th and 14th in Santa Clara, CA: http://www.gradlesummit.com
