buildr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Boisvert <boisv...@intalio.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r792325 - /buildr/trunk/doc/testing.textile
Date Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:58:03 GMT
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Daniel Spiewak <djspiewak@gmail.com> wrote:

> > If it broke, I'll probably spend an hour of frustration before I catch
> why
> > my tests are not working as expected. On the other hand, buildr package
> > test=no vs buildr package build_test=no ... no contest.  And I like being
> > able to export test=no.
>
>
> I agree 100% that it should remain `buildr package test=no`.  It would
> drive
> me batty if we changed that.  However, I question whether export test=no is
> really all that useful.  Or, more importantly, I question whether `export
> BUILDR_TEST=no` is really all that inconvenient.  To me at least, this
> looks
> a lot more representative of what it's doing (setting the TEST property for
> the BUILDR tool).  I don't think there would be any confusion if we had
> BUILDR_TEST for the envar and test for the invocation form, particularly
> since one is capitalized while the other is not (as per the Unix
> convention).


This would be my preference as well... with the caveat that variable
bindings passed on the command-line would be specific to Buildr and no
longer general environment variable equivalents.   I understand it would
break from Rake conventions as well.

alex

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message