I concur. A nice idea, but no follow through. Marko.
http://markorodriguez.com On May 24, 2016, at 3:23 PM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> wrote: > yeah - the "fragility" was something i'd hoped to see addressed. the PR has > a long way to go to be something that could be really merged i think. Note > that groovysh does have: > > http://cndoc.github.io/groovy-doc-cn/en/groovysh.html#GroovyShell-doc > > so they already have something like this. it just opens a browser though > which isn't as nice as what was done in the PR. anyway, i think that "doc" > function in groovysh is what should be improved and not just have something > competing feature here in TinkerPop. > > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Daniel Kuppitz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> That's unfortunate, I liked the idea. However, most of the code was written >> to scrape content from web pages - that's a pretty fragile approach. That >> said, it looks like we wouldn't lose a lot if we drop it. Thus, no >> objections from my side. >> >> Cheers, >> Daniel >> >> >> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> We have this old PR that's just been hanging about: >>> >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-tinkerpop/pull/71 >>> >>> It's about a year old and probably won't merge anymore. The PR submitter >>> could never quite come back to it to act on the feedback we provided. It >>> was a nice idea and a good feature, but it was very rough. I've been of >> the >>> opinion to leave it open, thinking someone might pick up on the work, but >>> now i'm not so sure it's worth waiting anymore and we should just nudge >>> this in the direction of closing it, especially if the submitter doesn't >>> intend to work on it. >>> >>> My reasoning is pretty simple - this feature really shouldn't be a >>> TinkerPop feature. It should be a feature of groovysh and should be a PR >> to >>> Apache Groovy and not to us. If it went to Groovy, it would >>> be generally more useful to the whole Groovy community and would likely >> get >>> better maintenance and we would just inherit that. >>> >>> Anyone feel differently on that? >>> >>
