James M. Lawrence
2010-01-11 22:42:47 UTC
With the new DSL separation, two lines are needed to get the top-level
DSL inside a regular ruby program,
require 'rake'
include Rake::DSL
I suggest making this equivalent to
require 'rake/dsl'
This would not affect the present behavior of require 'rake'.
I am essentially requesting that you follow a convention which is
convenient and already in use (at least by me, e.g. pure/dsl,
cond/dsl). It's also my last chance to speak up before the existing
dsl.rb makes the feature backward-incompatible.
There are also other precedents for require 'project/feature' to
produce side effects needed by 'feature', for example spec/autorun and
minitest/autorun.
See pull request on github.
P.S. I was accepted to the Rake group on pivotal but I didn't see how
to create a feature request (or to do anything other than export CSV).
DSL inside a regular ruby program,
require 'rake'
include Rake::DSL
I suggest making this equivalent to
require 'rake/dsl'
This would not affect the present behavior of require 'rake'.
I am essentially requesting that you follow a convention which is
convenient and already in use (at least by me, e.g. pure/dsl,
cond/dsl). It's also my last chance to speak up before the existing
dsl.rb makes the feature backward-incompatible.
There are also other precedents for require 'project/feature' to
produce side effects needed by 'feature', for example spec/autorun and
minitest/autorun.
See pull request on github.
P.S. I was accepted to the Rake group on pivotal but I didn't see how
to create a feature request (or to do anything other than export CSV).