grouping layers

[slde-flash]

No description provided.

[jakzal]

This would be a great addition.

I just tried deptrac for the first time and being able to define layers within another layer is the only thing I seem to be missing. It should be possible to define high level dependency rules (controllers -> services -> repositories), and then additional dependencies withing the layer (services/A -> services/B).

[slde-flash]

thanks @jakzal,
i am working on #76 which will allow more complex configurations. this won't help to visualize high level dependencies, but it would be much more easy to define and enforce them.

i didn't tryed it, but for example you could build a configuration this way:

paths: ./
exclude_files: []
layers:
  - name: controllers
    collectors:
      - type: className
        regex: .*Controllers.*
  - name: services
    collectors:
      - type: className
        regex: .*Services.*
  - name: repositories
    collectors:
      - type: className
        regex: .*Services.*
  - name: servicesA
    collectors:
      - type: bool
      - must:
        # every rule form service
        - type: className
          regex: .*Services.*
        # every rule from servicesA
        - type: className
          regex: .*ServicesA.*
      - must_not:
        # every rule from servicesB
        - type: className
          regex: .*ServicesB.*
  - name: servicesB
    collectors:
      - type: bool
      - must:
        # every rule form service
        - type: className
          regex: .*Services.*
        # every rule from servicesB
        - type: className
          regex: .*ServicesB.*
      - must_not:
        # every rule from servicesA
        - type: className
          regex: .*ServicesA.*
ruleset: []

don't be scared of the verbosity of this solution #76 will help to build such depfiles much more comfortable.

the goal of this ticket would be generating a nice looking output based on such a (bit more complex) configuration.

[theofidry]

@jakzal on my end I solved it by having several files to run different level of analysis, cf. #68

[jakzal]

@slde-flash I actually solved it exactly the same way and that's why I came here to report we need a better way ;)

@theofidry not ideal! :)

[theofidry]

@jakzal for the reasons explained in #68, this solution doesn't suit ;)

[slde-flash]

i am still playing with different solutions. #90