On 2/28/07, mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Feb 28, 11:24 am, "Bob Ippolito" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > MochiKit is practical code, extracted from real projects, written by > > the people who built those projects. Our roadmap is to incorporate > > whatever generic functionality that we've built in our own projects > > that would be useful to other people. There's no overall goal other > > than to maintain the high quality of the implementation and > > documentation while we grow new functionality. > > Are contributions welcome?
Yes. I'd estimate that about half of MochiKit at least started off as a contribution. I won't accept just anything though. It has to either be something I see immediate value in, or something that the community (mailing list) gets behind. I'm definitely not going to take anything else for MochiKit 1.4 though :) Contributions should be released as "add-ons" until that happens. > > It's also hard to say that MochiKit "isn't really being developed" > > when there's a huge body of new code. There just haven't been any > > releases. The 1.4 release is imminent, but all of us are also very > > busy with our own companies. > > I understand about being busy. > > > > > Compared to Prototype it appears inactive? I don't think you're paying > > much attention to Prototype :) And what's their roadmap for future > > enhancements? It's nice that they finally got around to writing > > documentation after two years, but I have fundamental and practical > > problems with the way that library extends JavaScript objects. > > I haven't been paying much attention to any JavaScript libraries until > recently (prior to this project, I was doing desktop solutions). I'm > just doing some background research now, hence my initial post. It's > hard to evaluate the status of a project other than looking at the > activity on the mailing list, updates to the website, and general > noise about the project on the web. From that I determined prototype > might be more active than MochiKit. It appears I'm wrong ;-) You should probably also take a look at jQuery. It's kinda like Prototype in style, but it doesn't screw around with the built-in objects so it causes less problems. I don't like the way that idiomatic jQuery code is written, but that's because I don't like excessive().method().chaining().especially().when().mutating().state(). >From an overall technical/practical standpoint it seems worth looking at, though I can't say I've done more than look at the code (and ignore all of the fanboys that scour blogs/digg/reddit and sing jQuery praises). -bob --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MochiKit" 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/mochikit?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
