RE: Combining Builders, Tasks and Publishers?

> Instead of having 'builders', 'tasks' and 'publishers' as 
> separate concepts, why not combine them? E.g. Instead of:

Very good idea! +1

btw: it is almost NAnt, isn't it? Maybe we could also use NAnt's tasks
somehow direcly? :-) Triggers are only difference I see here.

Sourcecontrols coudnt be tasks also? There is some link to triggers (they
need to poll for modifications) but maybe they could be used as task also?
We need to think about this one longer.

Build/postbuild/prebuild? - what about simple failonerror="false" like NAnt
have?
What is done before/after builder is specified by order. And as Thibaut
point out there could be need task could fail even after build (I don't see
any such now, but there could be)

>Drawbacks:
>- May encourage complicated workflow that should be delegated to a build
script

Hmm. You mean some conditions etc? Perhaps mine proposal for <when>
publisher should be generalized to task. Or you mean something different?

>- Breaking change to configuration

I dont think it is problem (prior to 1.0). Moreover ccnet configs are quite
small (compared for e.g. NAnt's) so it's not so much effort to convert them.



Interesting idea !
Martin



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE
LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click