Skip to content

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

method for running tasks in series #3750

Closed
jdx opened this issue Dec 20, 2024 · 0 comments
Closed

method for running tasks in series #3750

jdx opened this issue Dec 20, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@jdx
Copy link
Owner

jdx commented Dec 20, 2024

I've been trying to avoid having the capability of defining task dependencies in series as an explicit feature just to keep things simple since it's trivially done just by calling mise run inside of a task:

[tasks.build]
run = ['mise run a', 'mise run b', 'mise run c']

however, because of several reasons (which I can explain if people are curious but I don't think it matters all that much), this just isn't good enough. I think we may need a way to explicitly define dependencies should run in series. I think users will like this because mise run I've often thought users see as a bit of a kluge even though it works fine. How do you think this could look in mise.toml? I think I only have terrible ideas:

[tasks.build]
depends_series = ['a', 'b', 'c']
[tasks.build]
depends = ['a', '+', 'b', '+', 'c']

I'm not 100% sure I would actually implement this. The drawbacks of not having this are not things we can't live with. Part of the issue is coming up with good syntax but the other is the complexity in the codebase this would add (which I'm not too sure about right now). Also the complexity of just having more features to document and explain to people how to use is a cost I'm weighing. Still, good syntax is definitely a blocker for starting it.

Repository owner locked and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 21, 2024
@jdx jdx converted this issue into discussion #3761 Dec 21, 2024

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant