Having both rails and rake commands is confusing: Just use rails as the command router.

[dhh]

Some commands live under rails others under rake and to the user it's not clear that there's a rhythm nor rime. Let's route all the rake commands through the rails command. It's still helpful and useful to use rake tasks such that we can allow others to declare task dependencies and such, but there's no reason it has to be exposed through rake on the CLI.

So after this, it should be rails test and rails db:setup.

[acutemedical]

I have to say thanks for this. Routing all rake tasks through the rails command really keeps things clean. Can't wait until this is implemented. Any chance of backporting to 3.2 4.1 4.2? I'm sure tons of people would love this.

[rafaelfranca]

@teknull we don't backport any new feature, sorry.

[acutemedical]

@rafaelfranca I figured that was the case, but one can dream. Some of us still have 3.2 apps floating out there. :)

[rafaelfranca]

Yeah. I'm in the same boat 😢

[dziulius]

How about also fixing environment setting for rails command?
rails server -e some_env
rails console some_env

[waiting-for-dev]

Shouldn't be better to only use rake and let to the rails command the only responsibility to create a new project? rake is the 'default' in all ruby world.

[dhh]

rake has a variety of issues around parameter parsing that we want to get around to increase the comfort of the CLI. And besides the app generator, we have a bunch of other generators. So filing everything under rails and delegating to rake where we can makes the most sense to me.

On Feb 13, 2015, at 02:08, Marc Busqué notifications@github.com wrote:

Shouldn't be better to only use rake and let to the rails command the only responsibility to create a new project? rake is the 'default' in all ruby world.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[joevandyk]

Is it possible to fix the rake parameter handling?

[dhh]

Exactly because rake is so embedded in everything, I think it makes change hard. But if someone wants to explore that, that's fine. I think we're still going to route it through the Rails command, since having servers like "rails server" and "rails console" as rake commands doesn't make much sense to me. But it would mean we'd have to do less hacking to get there.