Hi Pat, > Thanks for that Thibaut - I'll try to get it into the master soon, > when I have time to review the fork (I've fallen behind a bit in the > last few weeks, and that's not likely to improve until I'm back in > Australia mid-Feb)
thanks for your feeback. No worries - nothing is really urgent here. It will be just nice to have at some point, and will make it easier to use TS anywhere. cheers! Thibaut > > Cheers > > -- > Pat > > On 27/01/2009, at 6:26 AM, Thibaut Barrère wrote: > >> >> Hi Pat et al, >> >> just implemented this: >> >> ThinkingSphinx::Configuration.configure do |config| >> config.app_root = File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/..') >> config.app_env_task = :environment >> end >> >> commits are there: >> - >> http://github.com/thbar/thinking-sphinx/commit/313c99c6c8ffff4b43b1eec8c49616456281cb21 >> (app_root) >> - >> http://github.com/thbar/thinking-sphinx/commit/43f8b9e2b158118d958f97aa4a6dcbdaa607b43f >> (app_env_task) >> >> After thinking about it, I decided that Rake was wide-spread enough so >> that a symbol or string for app_env_task would be good enough >> (supporting a proc wouldn't be hard though). >> >> I'm quite happy with the external API, the spec and the fact that it >> works; I'm less happy with the internal implementation >> (Configuration.reset get called twice for instance, and a reset will >> not memorize the block passed to configure initially). Feel free to >> comment, patch or suggest anything to make it better. >> >> cheers, >> >> -- Thibaut >> >> >> On Jan 21, 4:45 pm, Pat Allan <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Thibaut >>> >>> What you're suggesting makes a lot of sense. If you want to get a >>> generic patch for it working, please, go ahead. My one suggested >>> change is make app_env_task accept strings or symbols indicating the >>> task name - Thinking Sphinx should be able to translate it to the >>> relevant call by itself (and if you want to make the setting accept >>> lambdas *as well* as strings and symbols, that'd be pretty cool too). >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> -- >>> Pat >>> >>> On 11/01/2009, at 8:01 PM, Thibaut Barrère wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Hi Pat, >>> >>>> toughts after a night: it would be much better not to rely on >>>> RAMAZE_ROOT (some thing that do not actually exist in Ramaze), but >>>> instead to provide extensions point. It would cover Ramaze and any >>>> other framework, too. >>> >>>> From what I've seen, the two extension points required today seem to >>>> be: >>>> 1/ app_root setting >>>> 2/ rake env task calling on app_env, if useful >>> >>>> (there is another question on how paths are build inside .conf file, >>>> but I'll noddle around it before suggesting something). >>> >>>> What about transforming TS so that it can let the caller configure >>>> itself (inversion of control) ?: >>> >>>> ThinkingSphinx::Configuration.configure do |config| >>>> config.app_root = my_ramaze_root >>>> config.app_env_task = lambda { Rake::Task[:environment].invoke } >>>> end >>> >>>> That would require some bits of refactoring, but would leave the >>>> ability to customize things for the end-user. The Rails/Merb default >>>> would be invoked, unless a config is provided to override it. >>> >>>> What do you think ? >>> >>>> regards, >>> >>>> -- Thibaut >> > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thinking Sphinx" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/thinking-sphinx?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
