I think, let's remove this stuff from the resource resolver for now, experiment with the flags in general and once we have a better picture, we can add it back again - either in the same way or totally different. We could also move the code to a branch or whiteboard so people can install the experimental resource resolver.
Carsten 2014-03-20 11:17 GMT-07:00 Carsten Ziegeler <[email protected]>: > The post problem is fixed, btw - features are only evaluated for GET/HEAD > requests > > Carsten > > > 2014-03-20 8:32 GMT-07:00 Justin Edelson <[email protected]>: > > Hi, >> >> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Justin Edelson >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> ...Feature Flags may look similar to >> >> ACLs, but they are useful for a different set of use cases than ACLs. >> >> Feature flags are about "orchestrating" features. Resource access is >> >> *one* part of this orchestration, but it is not the only part... >> > >> > Yes, when I said "similar to ACLs" this is specifically about the >> > resource access bits that we have in the resource resolver now. >> > >> > I'm totally convinced of the utility of feature flags in general, it's >> > just the magic in the resource resolver that I'm objecting to. >> >> Where you need that magic (or where it is higher value) is where a >> "feature" is composed of both behavioral changes in scripts *and* >> resource hiding. That's what I meant by "orchestration" and something >> I think would be challenging to do without support in the resource >> resolver. >> >> Regards, >> Justin >> >> > >> > -Bertrand >> > > > > -- > Carsten Ziegeler > [email protected] > -- Carsten Ziegeler [email protected]
