[Piglit] [PATCH 3/3] piglit: Add piglit command

[Dylan Baker]

On Wednesday, April 30, 2014 13:42:09 Jordan Justen wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Dylan Baker <baker.dylan.c at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 30, 2014 10:28:57 Jordan Justen wrote:
> >> The piglit command is a wrapper command for the
> >> piglit-<command>.py scripts.
> >>
> >> For example, running 'piglit run' is equivalent to piglit-run.py.
> >>
> >> It is installed to $PREFIX/bin/piglit, and will launch the
> >> sub-commands either at their installed location in
> >> $PREFIX/lib/piglit, or in the source tree.
> >>
> >> 'piglit help <command>' will run 'piglit-<command>.py --help'
> >> as expected.
> >>
> >> 'piglit', 'piglit help' or 'piglit --help' will show the list
> >> of possible sub-commands.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen at intel.com>
> >
> > I'm not at all happy with this approach.
> >
> > I would love to see a combined piglit interface, but I'd rather see
> > something using argparse with subcommands and replacing the existing
> > piglit scripts with wrappers for that.
> 
> Example? Instead of 'piglit run all results', what would you prefer?
> 
> Anyway, piglit_cmd.py is the source that controls the piglit command,
> so it can evolve to present something different.
> 
> This patch seems like a reasonable step which would allow you to then
> re-implement the unified interface as you see fit.
> 

It's not the interface I have a problem with, it's the implementation.
This isn't what we want at all. There is zero code here I would want to
use, and it creates a situation where the user interface will change,
and we're left with unhappy users.

> > This is a mess that will be hard to maintain.
> 
> Is it not equivalent to today in terms of maintenance?
> 
> -Jordan

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/piglit/attachments/20140430/aa155d5b/attachment.html>