3 ms·

Kind of interesting seeing mise grow and grow. Others have noted they encountered it first as a direnv replacement. At my last job it was an asdf tool-installer

Kind of interesting seeing mise grow and grow. Others have noted they encountered it first as a direnv replacement. At my last job it was an asdf tool-installer replacement. It's also a task and now mono-repo task runner. It feels a little fragile to me to try to tackle so many concerns: if folks start relying on mise for more capabilities and one of them falls short, isn't as good as it could be, that could be a big hurt. There's definitely a nice conceptual win to having an all in one tool, but scoping up ambition feels risky. Especially with task running, it feels like there's really so many very specific expert concerns that come into play. Being able to have a task graph & understanding the minimum work needed, being able to run only downstream tasks is a pretty important need, and that really gets into programming language specific views of what's happening. The idea of having something generic & so all is tempting but it feels impossible to get satisfactory results here. Beyond Mise specifically, it's just interesting seeing the continuum between specific & multi-purpose tool, and seeing how software tends to scope itself up.

kstrauser 1y ago
I'd counter that I actively don't want those more powerful features. Like, I get why anyone would want them, but right now Mise is "knowable". I can sit down with its doc site and figure out any of its features without building a strong mental model of their underlying implementation. And that also means my coworkers aren't as likely to abuse and twist it into the kinds of things people have used tools like Make for. I would vastly rather have Mise shell out to Make etc for more complex DAG stuff. Those tools already exist and are good at their own specialties. Mise doesn't need to reinvent everything. But I do think the new monorepo tasks are very on-brand for it. They don't seem so much as to add deep functionality as to provide a convention for finding and running other Mise files in a repo.
- jdxcode 1y ago
  > But I do think the new monorepo tasks are very on-brand for it. They don't seem so much as to add deep functionality as to provide a convention for finding and running other Mise files in a repo. yeah, "fancy bash scripts" is a good way to think about tasks
  - kstrauser 1y ago
    And that's the way I like it. heart_emoji.gif

kstrauser 1y ago

I'd counter that I actively don't want those more powerful features. Like, I get why anyone would want them, but right now Mise is "knowable". I can sit down with its doc site and figure out any of its features without building a strong mental model of their underlying implementation. And that also means my coworkers aren't as likely to abuse and twist it into the kinds of things people have used tools like Make for. I would vastly rather have Mise shell out to Make etc for more complex DAG stuff. Those tools already exist and are good at their own specialties. Mise doesn't need to reinvent everything. But I do think the new monorepo tasks are very on-brand for it. They don't seem so much as to add deep functionality as to provide a convention for finding and running other Mise files in a repo.

jdxcode 1y ago
> But I do think the new monorepo tasks are very on-brand for it. They don't seem so much as to add deep functionality as to provide a convention for finding and running other Mise files in a repo. yeah, "fancy bash scripts" is a good way to think about tasks
- kstrauser 1y ago
  And that's the way I like it. heart_emoji.gif