From: "T. Onoma" Date: 2004-09-09T20:46:03+09:00 Subject: Re: Rakeforms On Thursday 09 September 2004 02:12 am, Jim Weirich wrote: > T. Onoma wrote: > > I sent off an email too "Jim Weirich" but I'm not > > sure if he (you) got it. So I thought I just post here. > > I did get it ... thoughts below ... There you are! :) > > I was using a certain rakefile a lot so I modified it to read a yaml file > > for its needed parameters. It seem pretty useful in general so I though > > other might like it,or like to improve on it (it's for package management > > and development stuff), so I put in with rake itself and modified rak to > > check for a Rake.yaml file if no Rakefile was found. The Rake.yaml file > > specifies which Rakeform to use and it goes form there. > > Could you provide a specific example of how you use this? In many ways, > a Rakefile is a configuration file for building software, and I'm a > little hesitant to add a config file for a config file unless there are > compelling reasons. Understandable. The idea was simply to have common rakefiles easily reusable via YAML config --which are easier to read, write, etc. But yes, another level of indirection. The idea was that people could share highly useful/common "rakeforms". They rakefiles, which in turn are Ruby programs after all, just very high level. But they provide an easy way to fill out the open variables in the special rakefile. I don't know if something like this is really all that commonly useful or not. Just thought I suggest it and see if others had any ideas. As for me I have the one rakeform which does gem creation, rdoc generation, manual install, etc. Very useful, and surely useful to others as well. Using a YAML file to fill out the common variables is just neater/simpler, and then the rakefile itself is generic, so it can be shared. That's all. -- T.