PDK should be more modular #1011
Replies: 1 comment
-
👏 I'll be making an RFC soon for this cause I like power too. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Use Case
As a user, I would like to be able to easily use some of the features of PDK without having to drink the Kool-Aid(tm)
Specifically, I would like to be able to use the module building and code validation capabilities from within a system-native development stack (at my peril for ruby and puppet compatibility).
Describe the Solution You Would Like
I believe that parts of the stack that aren't directly related to user-oriented PDK tasks should be split into separate Gems to ensure that those parts can be independently upgraded with a minimum of external requirements.
Describe Alternatives You've Considered
Currently, I pull in the
pdk
gem and perform brain surgery to use the internal classes. This is both non-optimal and fragile for things that should be able to be run via CI systems without needing to install the entire PDK stack.Additional Context
I understand that I'm a relatively rare power-user use case but I think that supporting both the PDK-pure and those that have complex legacy stacks is a win for everyone. Also, modularity is almost always a good thing in terms of maintenance and testing.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions