Design: precedence contract for a consumer-supplied PesterConfiguration (#83)
Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.
- Lingua principale
- PowerShell
- Stelle
- 145
- Fork
- 27
- Merge medio
- 10h 16m
- PR unite (30g)
- 34
Descrizione
Part of #120 (Phase 3 — API improvements). Blocks #83.
Question
When a consumer supplies their own [PesterConfiguration] object via $PSBPreference.Test.Configuration, what wins — their object, or the existing $PSBPreference.Test.* settings?
#83 raises this and leaves it open. It is the one genuinely undesigned item left in v1.0.0, and it defines public API surface that freezes at 1.0.0 — getting the precedence wrong is a breaking change to undo later.
Note: #120 previously pointed at "joshooaj's design in #80". That pointer is stale — #80 is a different, already-closed request about
Output.VerbosityandRun.SkipRemainingOnFailure. There is no existing design to implement.
Open questions
- Precedence. Does the supplied object act as a base that
$PSBPreference.Test.*overrides, or as a final say that PowerShellBuild only fills gaps in? A consumer who sets both and gets the opposite of what they expected is the failure mode to design against. Run.Path. PowerShellBuild computes the test path today. If the consumer setsRun.Pathon their object, is it honored, ignored, or an error? The advanced surface permits multiple paths, which the current single-path model has no answer for.- Opinionated defaults. Which settings does PowerShellBuild insist on regardless (code coverage output location, result file paths, CI-detection behavior) because the surrounding build tasks depend on them?
- Discoverability. If a supplied setting is silently overridden, how does the consumer find out? Silent override is the worst outcome — worse than an error.
- Pester 5 and 6.
Test-PSBuildPestersupports both majors and the #137 matrix verifies both. Does the configuration object surface differ between them in ways that affect the answer?
How to resolve
Conversation, not code — /grilling plus /domain-modeling. @joshooaj should be in it: they raised #83 and the design questions are theirs. A prototype of the merge logic is reasonable if the discussion stalls on something concrete.
Done when
The precedence contract is written down here in enough detail that #83 can be implemented without further design decisions.
Guida per i contributori
Apri la guida per i contributori
Come iniziare
- Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
- Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
- Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
- Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.
Direzione di ricerca
Inizia leggendo #83 e i riferimenti a #120 e #137, quindi usa /grilling e /domain-modeling come richiesto. Risolvi tramite la discussione la precedenza, Run.Path, i valori predefiniti, la scopribilità e le differenze tra Pester 5/6. Il lavoro è completato quando il contratto di precedenza è documentato qui con un livello di dettaglio sufficiente per implementare #83 senza ulteriori decisioni di progettazione.
Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.
Valutazione
- Stack tecnologico
- powershell
- Ambito
- developer-experience, testing, tooling
- Tipo di issue
- Funzionalità
- Difficoltà
- 5/5
- Tempo stimato
- Più di una settimana
- Stato di attività
- Attiva
- Chiarezza
- Specificata chiaramente
- Idoneità per principianti
- 35/100