Re: [GSoC] Rewriting tasks.py to exclusively use UDD
Hi Iain,
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 06:37:18PM +0100, Iain R. Learmonth wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 07:23:11PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > However, I would not make this a preference since I noticed that the
> > code becomes quite hard to read that way and I would prefer clean code
> > over this feature. The rationale behind this is that it might turn out
> > to be a misfeature from a taktical point of view since it allows this
> > team to play in their own playground rather than using and enhancing
> > Blends tools directly. ;-)
>
> If you want RDF information to appear at rdf.debian.net about blends, I
> would suggest playing nice and providing this JSON file. That sounds like it
> would be really useful.
Just to be clear: I really would like to be nice to other use cases.
However, this "being nice" should not be done on the expense of
unreadable code. I consider the current bugs.py script as hard to
understand data structures because it is just using a nested set of
dictionaries which is very simple to dump into JSON but hard to debug.
Finally all information is in UDD and we dump the queries that are
merging the data in the form we need into stored procedures. As long as
nobody specifies some data format *in advance* we can just speculate
what might be useful or not. Thus creating hard to understand data
structures for possibly no use is not the best idea. On the other hand
if you specify what information could be used for rdf.debian.net this
most probably could be done.
> When I come to finishing off the blends websites, it would probably also be
> useful for tying the websites into the sentinels so that I don't have to do
> the manual listing of tasks.
Ahh - manual listing of tasks should definitely be avoided and an UDD
query that could present the needed data should be pretty easy!
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: