Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/PATCH] A cleaner API for virtualx.eclass

["Diego Elio Pettenò" <flameeyes@flameeyes.eu>]

I'd say, "Go for it!"

But on the other hand I wonder if it might make sense to have
something more generic, so that one only has to call something in a
way such as

virtualx_setup
run_tests --foo
virtualx_cleanup

The reason why I'm wondering this is that we need some more "virtual
environments" for testing purposes, really: so many packages need a
D-Bus session (and I'd rather have them using a test session than a
system one!), and at least in Ruby world we often need a database
(sometimes more than one)...
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flameeyes@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/


On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:14 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Hello, fellow developers,
>
> The current virtualx.eclass API is a bit insane. It seems a bit like
> stacking of a few next APIs, mostly designed to quickly run 'make
> check', then extended to general functions.
>
> For example running a function 'run_tests' with parameter '--foo' would
> look like:
>
>         VIRTUALX_COMMAND=run_tests virtualmake --foo
>
> which is really awful, considering that '--foo' is a parameter to
> 'run_tests' and not virtualmake.
>
> My patches introduce a single wrapper with argv-as-parameter syntax.
> That is, the fore-mentioned example would look like:
>
>         virtualx run_tests --foo
>
> Depending on the maintainer decisions and your feedback, I believe that
> even all the X* short-hand functions could be deprecated. They are a bit
> shorter:
>
>         Xemake check
>
> vs:
>
>         virtualx emake check
>
> but I don't think that's much of a difference.
>
> What are your thoughts?
>
>