Hi
Usman found that mooseDSM depends on Moose and that Moose depends on DSM. This shows a problem with the configurations in the Moose ecosystem. After thinking about it, there are two kinds of configurations: - first kind of a configuration should express the dependencies to systems that are mandatory. - the second kind represents "Full project" configurations that express a complete "applications" with all the subapplications. They do not express that the tool must all the dependencies to be resolved to work. For example, MooseAlgos are in Moose even if we do not use MooseAlgos. Such full project should not be referred too. => So we should distinguish such different configurations. For example Glamour as a UI builder should not depend on Roassal But Glamour as a full project can depend on Roassal. Then at the Moose or project level we can decide what to load. Stef _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
So smallDude exhibits the same syndrom
I will probably introduce a configuration of FullMoose is for loading the top level products and remove from Moose the dependencies to DSM and SmallDude because these cycles do not make sense But it may break the default Moose so I will wait for your point of view. Stf On 27/6/14 22:58, stepharo wrote: > Hi > > Usman found that mooseDSM depends on Moose and that Moose depends on DSM. > This shows a problem with the configurations in the Moose ecosystem. > After thinking about it, there are two kinds of configurations: > > - first kind of a configuration should express the dependencies to > systems that are mandatory. > > - the second kind represents "Full project" configurations that > express a complete "applications" > with all the subapplications. They do not express that the tool > must all the dependencies to be resolved to work. > For example, MooseAlgos are in Moose even if we do not use > MooseAlgos. > Such full project should not be referred too. > > => So we should distinguish such different configurations. > > For example Glamour as a UI builder should not depend on Roassal > But Glamour as a full project can depend on Roassal. > > Then at the Moose or project level we can decide what to load. > > Stef > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Hi, These problems exist since a long time and we came previously to the conclusion of introducing ConfigurationOfMooseEngines, ConfigurationOfFAMIX and ConfigurationOfMooseUI. Nobody had time or inclination to do it, and we are in the same situation now.
Ideally, the Moose/Moose repository should contain only the ConfigurationOfMoose package. Everything else should be moved in a separate repository with its own configuration. But, we should keep ConfigurationOfMoose as the top level one because it is known and there are external users of it. Is that Ok?
I am over my head in the following 1-2 weeks, but I can give a hand at least with reviewing. Cheers, Doru On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 11:48 AM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote: So smallDude exhibits the same syndrom "Every thing has its own flow"
_______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
On 28/6/14 12:09, Tudor Girba wrote:
I will do it.
Yes
Ok I should work on something more important but more boring but I will a pass one by one.
_______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |