On 2005-12-07, Sean Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 12/7/05 12:20 PM, "Jesse Erlbaum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I don't think the module name should change, but there is a larger >> architecture at work here, and I am all for naming it and promoting it. >> CGI-App (the module) is only one part of that architecture -- maybe a >> central part, but only one part. >> >> Let me say one thing about my own experience talking to people about the >> module: I'm getting a little tired of explaining to people "...don't >> let the 'CGI' in 'CGI-App' fool you -- it is not necessarily CGI-based." >> It does seem like some antiquated compatibility layer, if you only hear >> the name. >> >> I have it in mind to create a new CPAN module -- a Bundle which loads >> CGI-App and all the other popular modules. This bundle would also >> contain some infrastructure which implements popular best practices -- >> for instance, harness scripts to build up project scaffolding at the >> start. > > Agreeing with Jesse is usually a sure bet.... As a "casual user" of CGI::App > I found that one of the largest problems with using CGI::App at the > beginning was the infrastructure that probably comes as second nature to > "web developers". Simple issues like choosing a directory structure, > templating system, determining the plugins that are generally useful versus > those that have a more specific purpose, etc.
I also share this vision. In this direction we already have CGI::Application::Framework. However, I think there is still a lot more to do this area, which may be appear as enhancements to ::Framework or a separate project. My personal vision for this projects includes setting up a standard directory structure for a project. The default layout would promote best practices such as separate config files and automated testing. It should also include at least one helper script to do things like "run the test suite" or "deploy as par file". Rails has a script for copying the development database /schema/ to a new empty test database, and then populating with some default test data stored in some YAML format files for easy editting. As far as name voting, I remain undecided about a personal pick and just assume let someone else proceed with vote gathering and analysis. I do feel like a nickname of "CAP" is appropriate (as "Rails" is to "Ruby on Rails"). The longer formal name I'm less certain about. I'll throw out one more: CAPE. "CAPE let's your web applications fly. Built with over five years of best practices by professional developers, CAPE delivers great performance and ease of use whether you are deploying to shared hosting account or need the full power of mod_perl." CAPE (or "Cape" if we prefer) is short, sweet, and is evocative of a useful visual image, as long as you don't try to visualize one the project leaders in a spandex superhero outfit. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- Web Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=cgiapp&r=1&w=2 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
