Teach IInstantJobRegistry to accept named jobs

[nulltoken]

Pull request description

Follow up to #213
Provides a design escape hatch trough new overloads in IInstantJobRegistry.

PR meta checklist

• Pull request is targeted at main branch for code
• Pull request is linked to all related issues, if any.

Code PR specific checklist

• My code follows the code style of this project and AspNetCore coding guidelines.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have updated the appropriate sub section in the CHANGELOG.md.
• I have added, updated or removed tests to according to my changes.
  • All tests passed.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...NCronJob/Configuration/Builder/JobOptionBuilder.cs	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...NCronJob/Configuration/Builder/ParameterBuilder.cs	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...nJob/Configuration/Builder/ParameterOnlyBuilder.cs	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/NCronJob/Configuration/DynamicJobFactory.cs	94.44% <100.00%> (+8.33%)	⬆️
src/NCronJob/Registry/IInstantJobRegistry.cs	95.29% <100.00%> (+1.96%)	⬆️

[linkdotnet]

Hmm now that isn't the best choice. The user can do the following:

j => j.WithName("Foo").WithName("Bar");

As the ParameterBuilder also has a ParameterBuilder.

To remove the ambiguity, we could have a WithParameter property that directly returns the ParameterBuilder:

j => j.WithParameter.WithName("Foo");

[nulltoken]

On it.

[nulltoken]

I came up with a different proposal. Thoughts?

• Prevents the WithName().WithName() issue
• Allows the WithParameter().WithParameter() usage (for current fluent branches)
• Prevents the WithParameter().WithParameter() issue (for new fluent branch)
• Backward compatible (from an API standpoint)

May need to be cleaned up in v5 to come up with something tighter.

[linkdotnet]

Good start - but the API isn't quite there yet.

If the shape is what we want, we need some documentation for the feature and why it exists.

[nulltoken]

Good start - but the API isn't quite there yet.

If the shape is what we want, we need some documentation for the feature and why it exists.

Doco and changelog are on my todo list once you like the API shape enough.

[linkdotnet]

Good start - but the API isn't quite there yet.
If the shape is what we want, we need some documentation for the feature and why it exists.

Doco and changelog are on my todo list once you like the API shape enough.

We are 98% there. If we drop the abstract class, I like the API 100% ;)

[linkdotnet]

If you want, put this into the .editorconfig

It is not valid for the whole project, not just this place.

[nulltoken]

Done

[nulltoken]

As JobExecutionContext isn't a public type, dynamic jobs can't even declare it as parameter.
Switching this to IJobExecutionContext aligns with the what the doco advertizes

[nulltoken]

Good start - but the API isn't quite there yet.
If the shape is what we want, we need some documentation for the feature and why it exists.

Doco and changelog are on my todo list once you like the API shape enough.

@linkdotnet Done

[linkdotnet]

@nulltoken Thanks again - for everything!