On Mon, 6 Jan 2014 08:04:06 -0500 (EST) Josef Skladanka <jskla...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi Tim, > > sorry for the late reply, this somewhat slipped my mind :( > > Overall, I like the concept, and although I understand that this is > Proof-of-Concept, I'm a bit worried about the get_argparser() method > <https://bitbucket.org/fedoraqa/libtaskotron-demo/src/8e6c39c8cfb2fb659888b00f42c70b4c4e1a4c0d/libtaskotron/runner.py?at=master#cl-86>. > > Would it mean, that we need to know all the possible arguments in > advance? Or is this just a simple piece of code intended for > easy-to-use demo? It's just demo code - I wanted to get something working to demonstrate the description format and cut a few corners. Assuming that I understand your concern, my thought is to have a set of standard args like envr, release, arch etc. but allow for other args on a more-or-less per-task basis. The actual number of args will be limited by the types of input we trigger on, though. That being said, I'm not 100% sure that I understand what your concern is. Could you be a bit more specific about what you're concerned about? Tim
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ qa-devel mailing list qa-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/qa-devel
