Better nested container syntax

[muescha]

Nested containers introduced in #1232

Current syntax is:

  nested_container 'Speed Download 5.dmg'
  link 'Speed Download 5/Speed Download.app'

I suggest a more logical dsl for nested container:

  container 'Speed Download 5.dmg' do |c|
    link 'Speed Download 5/Speed Download.app'
  end

[muescha]

or if the container parameter give more information about the container

  container 'Speed Download 5.dmg' do |c|
    link '#{c.path}/Speed Download.app'
  end

[phinze]

Ooo good idea!

link '#{c.path}/Speed Download.app'

The Speed Download 5.dmg just so happened to have a folder named Speed Download 5 inside it; it's not our code that makes it. The destination path for the nested container extraction is the same as the primary container; they just layer on top of each other in the same directory.

So there's not really any information we have available to yield to the block; everything is still relative to the cask root.

I ❤️ the idea of the blocks expressing the nesting though. I'll try and pick this up on my next pass on this feature.

class SpeedDownload < Cask
  url 'http://mirror.nscocoa.com/~yazsoftc1/files/sd5/sd5.zip'
  homepage 'http://www.yazsoft.com/products/speed-download'
  version 'latest'
  no_checksum
  container 'Speed Download 5.dmg' do
    link 'Speed Download 5/Speed Download.app'
  end
end

[muescha]

Ah ok

And if it always the same path - what if link is relative to container then we can make it DRY:

  container 'Speed Download 5.dmg' do
    # because its inside the container
    # this calls link 'Speed Download 5/Speed Download.app'
    link 'Speed Download.app'
  end

[phinze]

And if it always the same path - what if link is relative to container then we can make it DRY:

Yeah I see what you're going for, but that's my point - it's not always the same path. It happened to be that Speed Download 5.dmg contained the following contents:

Speed Download 5/
Speed Download 5/Speed Download.app

There could be another app that does not nest inside a folder like that (in fact most dmg files just have a file directly in their root).

So given Another App.dmg with just the contents:

Another App.app

The syntax would be:

container `Another App.dmg` do
  link 'Another App.app'
end

Does that make sense?

[muescha]

Yes that makes sense.

[tapeinosyne]

Superseded by #6120 as part of our transition to DSL 1.0 (#4688).