Re: Replacment for getBuilders()

2016-10-21 Thread Jesse Glick
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:59 AM, wrote: > how about job property? Seems like a poor approach. My recommendation is KISS: if there is some information produced by a step which another step call might need, just return it and let the script bind it to a local variable. --

Re: Replacment for getBuilders()

2016-10-21 Thread fkpkot
how about job property? how you'd advise to implement it? On Thursday, October 20, 2016 at 3:27:10 PM UTC+3, Jesse Glick wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Fima > wrote: > > Do you mean that the pipeline step should return result Into the > pipeline > > code? And

Re: Replacment for getBuilders()

2016-10-20 Thread Jesse Glick
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Fima wrote: > Do you mean that the pipeline step should return result Into the pipeline > code? And than pass as a parameter for the recorder ? That is one option, yes. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Re: Replacment for getBuilders()

2016-10-19 Thread Fima
" If the path is somehow autogenerated, the builder could return a value to be passed later to the recorder." Do you mean that the pipeline step should return result Into the pipeline code? And than pass as a parameter for the recorder ? Or should somehow save it in the build . The recorder needs

Re: Replacment for getBuilders()

2016-10-19 Thread Jesse Glick
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 3:45 AM, wrote: > in > recorders, I do think that we should be able to look upon the steps so far > so we can record their results more easily by getting the correct paths and > data If the paths were passed as configuration to the “builder”, then you

Re: Replacment for getBuilders()

2016-10-19 Thread fkpkot
Thanks, well I've seen many recorders that relay on getting the builders list in order to retrieve their result file (for example - getResultFileName). Especially in large plugins they might have several outcomes of result files with unique name that's generated during the build. I understand

Re: Replacment for getBuilders()

2016-10-18 Thread Jesse Glick
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:20 AM, wrote: > Has anyone found nice workaround which doesn't involve ugly parameter > passing? What exactly needs to be worked around? Each step should be self-contained. If it needs to be told where to look for files, tell it. -- You received