On Jul 11, 3:21 pm, "Aaron Patterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Separate scripts are more intuitive than rake tasks? I understand what you thinking, but there are some considerations involved. The reason we should use scripts rather than the Rakefile (whether it be via the traditional setup.rb script or through separate scripts as I have suggested) is because the end-installer ought not need Rake to preform an installation (Rake is not included in Ruby 1.8+, btw). Moreover, a rakefile is intended for project maintainers -- it can have all sorts of maintainer tasks in it, including things like packaging, uploading, publishing the website, making an announcement, etc. There's no reason to provide an end user with these functions, just as some support files are not included in a package. Finally, setup.rb is not a simple script, and personally I wouldn't want to re- implement all that as a Rake task (though I have in fact gone down that path once, only to realize afterward that it was a pointless affair for the other reasons stated). The Rakefile can easily route to the separate end-user scripts as needed. T. _______________________________________________ libxml-devel mailing list libxml-devel@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/libxml-devel
