Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Jeremy Blosser <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org>]

On Nov 16, Andrew [afrayedknot AT thefrayedknot.armory.com] wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 01:07:34PM -0600, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> > The first issue could be resolved changing the name of the file to
> > STAGED_INSTALL instead of POST_INSTALL.  This would make it clear(er) what
> > this step does, assuming you apply the default as you suggested.  It
> > doesn't resolve the second issue, but maybe with that name it's more
> > obvious to people that anything they want to do ahead of the 
> > STAGED_INSTALL
> > can go in that file ahead of the default call.  The other way to fix the
> > second issue is probably yet another spell file and I imagine we want to
> > avoid that.
> 
> I dont like STAGED_INSTALL becase it comes after POST_INSTALL. That may
> seem unintuitive to someone unfamilar with staging.

You're right; it's also not really a correct term since this is the install
that isn't staged.

> > Or maybe we do:
> > 
> > ... -> INSTALL -> INSTALL_EXTRAS -> POST_INSTALL -> STAGED_INSTALL -> 
> > FINAL
> > 
> > since POST_INSTALL does exist already.  This would let people make their
> > changes in POST_INSTALL and they'd have the option to override the staged
> > install but obviously usually wouldn't need to know that was even there.
> > 
> 
> Assuming we go with the split file approach, I would replace
> STAGED_INSTALL with TRANSFER.

TRANSFER works as well as anything I can come up with... in staging
terminology you'd call this PROMOTE but that doesn't really work in the
context.  Looking at the thesaurus the only other likely candidate I see is
COMMIT, which I think does make some sense and has an existing meaning to
developers that is consistent with what's going on, but isn't a completely
compelling term either.

Whatever you think works.

Attachment: pgpZsk6mbbAEs.pgp
Description: PGP signature