Hey Rupert, Thanks for the feedback! I wouldn't be opposed to the idea of dropping the library directly within dm-is-state_machine in order to guard against changes. It certainly raises a more general decision around how dm-more plugins want to be organized and maintained... but that may be a whole other conversation altogether :)
>From what I can tell, dm-types and dm-sweatshop are the only libraries (excluding adapters) that have other dependencies. Regards, Aaron On Apr 9, 5:37 am, Rupert Voelcker <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Aaron > > 2009/4/9 Aaron Pfeifer <[email protected]>: > > > I wanted to take this opportunity to start conversations with some > > folks here who either use dm-is-state_machine or have an interest in > > using state machines in their DM projects. Specifically, I would be > > interested in: > > * Any / all feedback on state_machine and the integration with > > DataMapper... e.g. Are there things missing or that can be improved? > > Does the integration fit in with DM / Merb conventions? > > * Is there interest in migrating dm-is-state_machine's implementation > > to internally delegate to state_machine so that you can take advantage > > of the additional features? > > I have used dm-is-state_machine in the project I'm working on and > found it very nice to work with. The only thing that was missing that > I needed was the ability to put guards on state transitions. I did > hack together some code in my lib directory to add this (no tests or > specs for it I'm afraid as the app is purely cucumber driven so I've > not been writing specs at this level). I've gisted the code at: > > http://gist.github.com/92346 > > The only additional thought I had after hacking this was that it may > be an idea to replace the :guard param with :if and :unless to allow > for positive/negative guards. > > I personally have no strong opinion on whether dm-is-state_machine's > implementation is migrated or not - as long as it's available somehow. > Although having said that my preference would be against having > dependencies within dm-more - mainly to guard against dm-more being > dependent on things that may not be kept up to date with dm > developments. So if dm-is-state_machine stays in datamapper core, > then I think the code should all be in there. > > Cheers > > Rupert --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DataMapper" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/datamapper?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
