[Gusdev-gusdev] Re: speaking of pipelines

[Dave B. <db...@pc...>]

Hey folks,

A follow-up on my email from last week suggesting adding a --commit flag 
to the pipeline API to handle committing plugins called by the pipeline.

Since I have heard two people say this is a good idea, and no one say it 
is a bad idea, I am going to make this change.

What this means for you is that after I put this into CVS (will do so 
soon), and you check it out, you will have to add the --commit flag to 
your command line in order to have any plugins in your pipeline run in 
commit mode.

I will make this backward compatible in pipeline code by having the method 
'runPluginNoCommit()' continue to run a plugin without committing the 
results, even if the --commit flag is set in the command line.  But I 
would suggest that you go through and change 'runPluginNoCommit' in your 
pipelines to 'runPlugin' and use the --commit flag only to 
restrict committing results.

I will let everyone know when this change is, um, committed to CVS.

Dave

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Dave Barkan wrote:

> I was also thinking it would be nice to give pipelines another parameter (in 
> addition to the properties file parameter they have now.)  The second one 
> would be the --commit flag.  Right now committing plugins and scripts are 
> done in the pipeline code itself, and the user has to change the code when 
> they just want to test the pipeline and the plugins contained therein.
>
> If we had a commit flag on the command line instead of in the code, then we 
> could prevent having to change the code for testing, as well as force the 
> user to explicitly state they want to commit code, which guards against 
> accidentally running in commit mode.
>
> How does that sound?  It would require some tweaking in the Manager 
> (currently we have the explicit methods available, 'runPlugin' and 
> 'runPluginNoCommit' which would have to be changed to take the flag given on 
> the command line), as well as in existing pipelines which are using the 
> Manager, but it would be only a small amount of work.
>
> Dave
>