Aristotle Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 04/24/2008 12:32:12 PM:
> * Jonathan Rockway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-04-24 19:10]: > > * On Thu, Apr 24 2008, Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote: > >> * Jonathan Rockway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-04-24 11:25]: > >>> * On Thu, Apr 24 2008, Jon Schutz wrote: > >>> > No problems, if that's what the Catalyst standard says; I > >>> > must have missed it. Where is it? I'd like to consult it on > >>> > a number of matters... please post the link. > >>> > >>> Basically it's more of a "zeitgeist" than an actual document. > >>> There are some things that the community has decided and > >>> "just do". > >> > >> That?s the sort of feel-good bollocks I?d expect to read on a > >> Rails hype blog, not here. Unspoken rules and gut feel are no > >> way to run a community. Catalyst suffers from this in general: > >> way too little is written down, much less in any systematic > >> fashion. > > > > Nobody has time to run a bureaucracy. We just want to write > > code. > > Yes, backcompat code. And I suppose the time to run a deprecation > cycle bureaucracy will find itself. File under ?false laziness.? If you expect behavior over cycles, write test code. If changes happen that make that test fail it will prompt discussion and offset the depreciation cycle to the closest change set. If you want to document down to the dot, without test code -- you are in for a world of outdated documentation. -Wade _______________________________________________ List: Catalyst@lists.scsys.co.uk Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst@lists.scsys.co.uk/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
