groundwork complete

This commit is contained in:
Joey Hess 2020-09-15 16:29:38 -04:00
parent a5d5935c0e
commit 929de3bb37
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: DB12DB0FF05F8F38

View file

@ -24,7 +24,10 @@ Maybe the json output should include a field that mirrors the input that
resulted in this line, be it a filename or an url, or a directory, or resulted in this line, be it a filename or an url, or a directory, or
whatever. whatever.
{"command":"add","input":"./foo","success":true,"key":"SHA256E-s30--ce0c29e173009d77fa8803fae163b7c85920248add208bc378d465cae3087962","file":"foo"} {"command":"add","input":["./foo"],"success":true,"key":"SHA256E-s30--ce0c29e173009d77fa8803fae163b7c85920248add208bc378d465cae3087962","file":"foo"}
> This is now implemented on the batchasync branch, for all commands
> that support json output.
(Note that, --batch currently does not operate on directories. (Note that, --batch currently does not operate on directories.
Because of the one line or reply per line of input rule. Because of the one line or reply per line of input rule.
@ -59,4 +62,9 @@ possible, feels cleaner than wrapping input and output with a job id like
the ASYNC extension does. Those changes would also generally be an the ASYNC extension does. Those changes would also generally be an
improvement to json output in non-async mode. improvement to json output in non-async mode.
> Ok, the input field is implemented, and it seems we can probably
> ignore the complication of the blank line for skipped input.
> So, it should be possible to actually implement the concurrent
> batch mode now. --[[Joey]]
[[!tag projects/datalad]] [[!tag projects/datalad]]