Public SourceMage Discussion List

[David Kowis <dkowis AT shlrm.org>]

On 1/27/2013 3:29 PM, Jaka Kranjc wrote:
> On Sunday 27 of January 2013 15:13:23 David Kowis wrote:
>>> But, even if it were efficient: Spells hacking DETAILS with Bash
>>> scripting are scary for the folks who didn't start this. They are hard
>>> to maintain, and they keep side-stepping the question if Sorcery should
>>> support multi-version spells ...
>>>
>>> Spells that consist of CONFIG and optionally PRE_BUILD/BUILD, INSTALL,
>>> FINAL, if needed, would work for me. Perhaps one could condense the
>>> optional scripts, though.
>>>
>>> You skipped that one in the list, didn't you?
>>
>> I'd be more tolerant of keeping them as individual files if they were
>> independent. The spell files, however, are not independent. They are
>> exceptionally interdependent. We create variables in one, and reference
>> them in others. They're tightly coupled, in general. Perhaps splitting
>> configuration from installation, but then we've only got two, and even
>> then we'll need to do some checks to know how it's configured depending
>> on certain installation logics. I don't believe they're separate files
>> in anything other than logical organization on the disk.
> I'd call this a great exaggeration. Most spells don't use any extra 
> persistent 
> variables, but [citation needed]. Coupling is looser than I'd expect, since 
> as 
> was already pointed out, you can run separate stages with delve (DETAILS 
> being 
> the only "global" file).

Postfix does, it defines two in CONFIGURE, and in two different spots
for one of them, thanks to logic. As well as one in PREPARE.

So with delve, I could run just BUILD without running CONFIGURE part and
expect it to work? Or will delve happily go parse the first part so that
BUILD will run? The ability to run individual phases will not go away,
and should not. I don't mean to imply that. But the spell configuration
files are not independent items that exist without the other files. The
spell itself is made up of all those files.

> 
> Anyway, you haven't managed to show any usability or practical gains yet, 
> so 
> this still falls under "unnecessary work with dubious benefits" for me.

Opening one file instead of eleven (in the case of postfix,
specifically) is not a benefit? I would find it much easier to switch
contexts in one file, rather than many, and having to remember in which
file which persistent variable was added.

Perhaps the majority of spells that I encounter are the more complicated
ones that require me to switch contexts and do more work. Perhaps 99% of
our spells are really simple with just a CONFIGURE, DEPENDS, and DETAILS
files. Perhaps I'm missing the forest for the trees that I'm
encountering, and since it's a thorn in my side, (to use lots of
metaphors at once) I'd like to see the problem resolved.

Thanks again,

David Kowis

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature