You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@allura.apache.org by Dave Brondsema <da...@brondsema.net> on 2013/08/21 00:24:34 UTC
ok to remove Application.tool_version ?
I'm doing some cleanup in the ForgeTracker models to make them not use some
global context vars like c.app Models shouldn't depend on the current context.
Down this rabbit trail, I get to:
class Artifact(MappedClass):
...
tool_version = FieldProperty(
{ str: str },
if_missing=lambda:{c.app.config.tool_name:c.app.__version__})
And this throws an error if tool_version isn't specified, and c.app isn't set.
I want to remove tool_version altogether, since it doesn't seem to be used
anywhere. I have a vague memory of ancient architecture plans to support tools
with explicit version numbers and upgrade paths and downgrade paths, and I
assume this artifact-level field is a result of that. We don't have that
functionality now, and I don't see a strong use-case to re-create it.
Any reason not to remove Application.tool_version?
--
Dave Brondsema : dave@brondsema.net
http://www.brondsema.net : personal
http://www.splike.com : programming
<><
Re: ok to remove Application.tool_version ?
Posted by Cory Johns <cj...@slashdotmedia.com>.
+1 Jerk it out
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Tim Van Steenburgh <
tvansteenburgh@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm +1 on removing it.
>
>
> On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Dave Brondsema wrote:
>
> >
> > I'm doing some cleanup in the ForgeTracker models to make them not use
> some
> > global context vars like c.app Models shouldn't depend on the current
> context.
> > Down this rabbit trail, I get to:
> >
> >
> > class Artifact(MappedClass):
> > ...
> > tool_version = FieldProperty(
> > { str: str },
> > if_missing=lambda:{c.app.config.tool_name:c.app.__version__})
> >
> >
> > And this throws an error if tool_version isn't specified, and c.app
> isn't set.
> > I want to remove tool_version altogether, since it doesn't seem to be
> used
> > anywhere. I have a vague memory of ancient architecture plans to support
> tools
> > with explicit version numbers and upgrade paths and downgrade paths, and
> I
> > assume this artifact-level field is a result of that. We don't have that
> > functionality now, and I don't see a strong use-case to re-create it.
> >
> > Any reason not to remove Application.tool_version?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dave Brondsema : dave@brondsema.net (mailto:dave@brondsema.net)
> > http://www.brondsema.net : personal
> > http://www.splike.com : programming
> > <><
> >
> >
>
>
>
Re: ok to remove Application.tool_version ?
Posted by Tim Van Steenburgh <tv...@gmail.com>.
I'm +1 on removing it.
On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Dave Brondsema wrote:
>
> I'm doing some cleanup in the ForgeTracker models to make them not use some
> global context vars like c.app Models shouldn't depend on the current context.
> Down this rabbit trail, I get to:
>
>
> class Artifact(MappedClass):
> ...
> tool_version = FieldProperty(
> { str: str },
> if_missing=lambda:{c.app.config.tool_name:c.app.__version__})
>
>
> And this throws an error if tool_version isn't specified, and c.app isn't set.
> I want to remove tool_version altogether, since it doesn't seem to be used
> anywhere. I have a vague memory of ancient architecture plans to support tools
> with explicit version numbers and upgrade paths and downgrade paths, and I
> assume this artifact-level field is a result of that. We don't have that
> functionality now, and I don't see a strong use-case to re-create it.
>
> Any reason not to remove Application.tool_version?
>
>
> --
> Dave Brondsema : dave@brondsema.net (mailto:dave@brondsema.net)
> http://www.brondsema.net : personal
> http://www.splike.com : programming
> <><
>
>