Ah, no I didn't mean maintaining two versions. Just making sure that everything 
in current Camping works as it should (not sure it does, my migrations aren't 
happening) and then freeze it. Call it Camping classic and then re-write it to 
be well designed for extensibility. With readable code and all. The names for 
things in our methods should be more then one character lång when we aren't 
worrying about size anymore.

Cheers!

Isak Andersson

david costa <gurugeek...@gmail.com> skrev:

Hi all :)

I have been playing with Sinatra a lot lately and perhaps *some* things are 
done easily there (URL mapping, static files) but being a DSL and not a 
framework it is a bit different. For many things camping does the job very well 
and overall I find it a more comprehensive solution than Sinatra. 


For the classic/new versions I think the issue would be if the main code 
maintainer (Magnus) should decide if he is willing to do that. Of course other 
people could do that too but it would still be two versions to maintain or, if 
you are freezing camping-classic as it is it should at least have a light 
maintenance that ensures that it would still works fine. 


Everyone can fork (e.g. camping-couch is a gem with couch db and no active 
record) the only issue is maintenance and build momentum about it !

Regards

David




On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Isak Andersson <icepa...@lavabit.com> wrote:

Right. We could just have a branch called "classic" on github. Leaving 
everything untouched.

And then change the gem name to camping-classic or something.

Maybe we should rewrite it afterwards (kind of). And make it backwards 
compatible with Camping applications. Just make the infrastructure simple and 
minimalistic. And make it easy to extend and configure. I think this would be 
the best thing ever for Camping more or less.

Cheers!

Isak Andersson

Philippe Monnet <r...@monnet-usa.com> skrev:

On one hand everyone is free to fork anything to change radical direction. This 
would allow for the size and some design constraints to be eliminated. But on 
the other hand, at this point in time (since we are the new community) 
shouldn't we free ourselves from the original constraints and just ignore the 
size aspect? I personally think so. It does not mean we have to "go crazy" and 
make it large and complicated (like Rails).
With the source being on Github, we can just designate the current version as 
the "classic" (super micro version) and document very explicitly that from now 
on we will be free of these constraints and explain how people can still get 
the "classic" version. Since the framework has proven extremely stable and 
resilient, this would not prevent any tinkerer who needs the classic version to 
just do so.
Although it has been fun to reference the size when talking about Camping, 
keeping it reasonably simple and small is good enough for me.

"... free free set them free ..."

On 4/13/2012 9:55 AM, Isak Andersson wrote: 

I agree, I'd like to see the way Camping works to grow in to something much 
more usable. Perhaps a fork is a good idea because the legacy would remain and 
all. But then in the fork we could deal with things that might be kind of 
annoying at times. And grow it with a steady pace.

If we'd fork camping I think we should still stay as minimalistic as possible. 
Only adding the best things. And work on making it easy to extend.

Cheers!

Isak Andersson

Dave Everitt <dever...@innotts.co.uk> skrev: 

There's a crucial point here... if 3k (the old 4k) is a 'proof of concept' and 
a great exercise in programming skill, it isn't something that most users will 
really worry about. If the 3k limit has to be broken back up to 4 or even 5k to 
get some added/altered/optional functionality that would help usability for the 
rest of us, it's not an issue for me - DaveE


3kb is great and all, but it seems kind of dishonest if the framework isn't 
even really usable without a bunch of other gems and files and stuff. The 
conflict between 3/4kb and having robust well designed features often seems to 
haunt this project. Maybe time for a forking? I have next to no interest in 3kb 
as a real feature.


Get the best selection of online sites here. Click Here to check them out!
http://click.lavabit.com/dijea1fjy66jdsnewkjgbtrhtydj4b1pdtfh1jbkrr736gayp7sb/ 



_______________________________________________ Camping-list mailing list 
Camping-list@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/camping-list 


        Play Your Favorite Free Games Right On Your Browser - 100% Free!
        
http://click.lavabit.com/d663gxud89959x7mk3m3o7u8hp6r8h6yfbx1dkxash7qztba1ify/ 


_______________________________________________
Camping-list mailing list
Camping-list@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/camping-list


        Get the best selection of cell phone sites here. Click Here to check 
them out!
        
http://click.lavabit.com/6q99xb3hbqi7x1ayckxg8nri1ihmuwngfqcgf1dhq9abaf4d535y/ 

_______________________________________________
Camping-list mailing list
Camping-list@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/camping-list

Reply via email to