Bring in new task system (bach)

[yocontra]

• Confirm 100% code coverage/test coverage on bach + child modules
• Switch task system to bach (+ registry layer)
• Update tests to use new task system
• Update documentation folder

Does anyone care about being backwards compatible for a little bit or should we just rip this off like a bandaid?

[phated]

Rip off the bandaid

[yocontra]

👍

[irrg]

Rip it off, for the sake of progress!

[tkellen]

Rip off the bandaid.

Bach looks great. Nice work @phated!

[OverZealous]

+1 for ripping off the band-aid.

Would it make sense to include a once() method in Bach as was being discussed on issue #347? Basically, a wrapper around an async method that guarantees it will only be run once.

[phated]

@tkellen thanks, much appreciated

[sindresorhus]

Rip it off.

[terinjokes]

🙀

[jarvys]

Where can we see any progress?@robich's develop branch?

[tomasdev]

👍 ye-yeah

[phated]

probably better if you look at the blaine branch

[jasonrhodes]

@phated Looks like you're adding bach as a dependency of orchestrator right now—is the idea to make a gulp > orchestrator > bach dependency chain or gulp > bach?

[phated]

@jasonrhodes gulp > orchestrator > bach + registry

[gaboesquivel]

+1 for .once() and...

[aeharding]

+1 for series/parallel/once.

I'm so excited! I have a huge gulpfile already (trying to move from Grunt), and this will make things easier and more reliable without having to spend a week getting comfy with orchestrator. The old way of doing series with dependencies wasn't good enough... It added a lot of repetitive code (spaghetti too to maintain/debug), increasing exponentially with each task you add...

Rip it off! 🏥

[sindresorhus]

What's the status on the new task system?

[pkozlowski-opensource]

So, after playing with all the elements of the new gulp task system I must say that @phated did grand job here! For anyone interested in looking into what Gulp4 file might look like, here is a (working!) example:
https://github.com/pkozlowski-opensource/gulp4-poc/blob/master/gulpfile.js

From what I can see / understand there is one problem to solve: timing tasks. On top of this there are number of cleanups / corner-cases handling items to tackle but yeh, the main idea seems to be here and I must say I totally love it. Hope that introducing timing tasks won't turn things upside down!

I'm planning to switch to this POC in the real projects in the coming days / weeks and tackle all the issues I can find but again, the main building blocks seem to be in place :-)

[yocontra]

@pkozlowski-opensource Yeah, @phated did do an awesome job with this concept. I have to say I'm enamored with bach, I just hope we can get it released ASAP before people get too cozy with the current system. Timing tasks is difficult, I think @phated had some ideas about that - the last time we spoke about it I think that logic was going to end up in the registry

[mlmorg]

Would it be possible to peel apart task series/parallel functions in order to add/remove additional tasks to them with this new approach? In other words, can you alter a task function once it's been created?

For example, let's say an external library sets up a build task that has a default set of dependent tasks it runs in series (for example, clean, compile and deploy). Would it be possible to step into that task function and alter it to run a versioning task between the compile and deploy steps?

[phated]

@mlmorg no, but composition based on environment, etc, should be easy with if/else, arrays and .apply.

[acdlite]

I'm late to this party, so forgive my naivety, as suspect what I'm about to suggest has already been considered and rejected... but why not just use promises? If we bring back gulp.run and have it return a promise, it seems to solve this issue entirely. Plus, there already popular many libraries that deal with async coordination — and with promises specifically, like bluebird and co — that it feels unnecessary for gulp to reinvent the wheel with its own API. I've been using promises to manage gulp tasks for a while and it works like a charm.

Am I missing a use case that promises don't solve?

[heikki]

@acdlite robrich/orchestrator#26 (comment)

[heikki]

I have no opinion related to promises.. just pointing to one place I remember same thing being mentioned :). On the other hand I'm happy with the current plan because it matches node-async syntax (series/parallel).

[coen-hyde]

I'm super excited about this new task system! Is the Gulp 4.0 branch ready for beta users?

[pikeas]

+1. I've followed the trail of breadcrumbs around Github, but I can't figure out where Bach and/or Gulp 4.0 are being worked on!

[phated]

There is a branch called 4.0. I'd probably start there?

[alvint]

While working on this, it would be nice if forward references to tasks were allowed. See #802.

P.S. - Great job so far!

[bnjmnt4n]

Any ETA for Gulp 4 to be released?

[yocontra]

@D10 Trying to get it finished out before the end of 2014 but the holidays will probably have everyone preoccupied. I'm in the middle of moving our company across the country so I haven't had a ton of time to put towards closing out 4.0 issues

[bnjmnt4n]

@contra thanks for the update! You should probably tag this issue with gulp4.

[therebelrobot]

bump :) totally stoked for gulp 4

[yocontra]

If anybody wants to help ship this faster: https://github.com/phated/undertaker/issues

[phated]

Closing this because the 2 remaining items are separate issues now: #978 and #861

[ilanbiala]

Can you update the original comment to get rid of the remaining items so that this issue seems complete?

[phated]

@ilanbiala done