Hi Jeff, Answers inline...
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Jeff Forcier <[email protected]> wrote: > > Right now we actually organize via Redmine instead of GH -- could you > please make a ticket at code.fabfile.org and put a link to your pull > request? :) > I filed the ticket, and can use that redmine system to follow up. 3) Take advantage of the upcoming move to object-oriented tasks and > have fabric.main simply attach the return value of task1 as an > attribute on task2, which may then opt to access that data as > necessary. Similar to 1) but isn't using a global shared state, only a > per-task-object state -- feels a lot cleaner. We could also do > something with methods here if we wanted, instead of just using > objects as data bags -- many possibilities. > > I think 3) makes the most sense -- this would be a new feature > regardless and that seems like by far the cleanest way to implement > it. > Yep, I like the third option as well. > Just an FYI that we have half-formed plans regarding the general > problem of task arguments and typing: > > http://code.fabfile.org/issues/show/69 > Thanks, I'll keep tabs. I'd encourage you all to keep tabs on libcloud: http://incubator.apache.org/libcloud/ My approach is going to be to create fab functionality out of some of the libcloud primitives (providers, node specs/sizes, node images, node instances, etc.) Some of this could extend into "fabric" functionality... such as specifying and handling env.providers, etc. > P.S. Going on the road again for the next 4 days so if I am delayed in > replying, that's why =) > > Have a good trip! Thanks again, -Justin -- Justin Donaldson, BigML, Inc. o: 313-31BIGML | c: 919-BUZZJJD
_______________________________________________ Fab-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fab-user
