I just had to pop in and say this is all very interesting stuff. I'd like to help too.
On Jan 7, 8:49 am, "Guillermo Rauch" <[email protected]> wrote: > Most of the time people will be integrating the JS into other files, the CSS > in their own stylesheets (while also modifying them), and the images in > their own images folders. At the end of the day it doesn't matter what > directory structure the plugin developer chose. > > Here are the coding style guidelines that MooTools > followshttp://wiki.github.com/mootools/mootools-core/syntax-and-coding-style... > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Benjamin Gonzales < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > Excuse my english. > > > What I propose is that mootools should provide standards for the > > development of plugins can be. > > - Structure of the files of the plugins, example: > > +--fancyUpload2 > > +---images > > +---js > > +------FxProgressBar.js > > +------SwiffUploader.js > > +---cs > > +------fancyUpload2.css > > +---loadplugin.js > > > - Convention of names. > > - Coding Style. > > - Between(Among) others. > > > Thus, it would be much easier to integrate and not as now everyone develops > > without rules, and everything is chaos > > > Benjamín Gonzales > > > 2009/1/7 csuwldcat <[email protected]> > > >> Considering what you said above Arron about releasing stuff, can I > >> email you a link to a site I have been working on that uses Moo > >> extensively? (read: a shit ton) > > >> We will eventually be releasing some of the cooler Moo scripts and > >> snippets we use on the site to the community. It isn't finished and > >> ready to go out the door but we think it is going to make a decent > >> market impact in it's segment. If it does succeed, we would also > >> really like to give Moo so much deserved credit/traffic. > > >> Two reasons why I would want someone like you to check it out: > > >> 1. You have experience and are seasoned in the startup routine and you > >> are a pretty darn good coder, from what I have seen. > >> 2. We have wanted a critical eye on this for a while to give us real > >> feedback. > > >> Under two conditions: > > >> 1. that you will not publish the link :) > >> 2. and under a gentleman's agreement that you wouldn't use core > >> elements you see - not that you would, my team would just want me to > >> say this mumbo jumbo :) > > >> Care to have a look? Just let me know where to email you at! > > >> - Daniel > > >> On Jan 6, 6:50 pm, nutron <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > This has been discussed here and on the forums and in IRC a lot. Why > >> doesn't > >> > MooTools do more to promote itself? > >> > The short version is that popularity isn't something that the dev team > >> is > >> > focused on. I, personally, would like to see MooTools have a lot more > >> > corporate sponsorship/use, but I recognize that it's a double edged > >> sword. > >> > jQuery and it's team spends a lot of energy evangelizing and it pays off > >> for > >> > them with deals w/ Microsoft and others. MooTools is more focused on > >> core > >> > development and the dev team is apparently content to continue on at the > >> > current pace. > > >> > To the extent that I disagree with that line of reasoning I've taken > >> matters > >> > into my own hands and I blog (on clientcide) several times a week and > >> > release a lot of the code I write (which takes a lot of time). > > >> > The two ways all of you can contribute to MooTools' impact on the web > >> are to > >> > contribute to the core itself (via github) and to release your own code > >> > (something I wrote about just the other day: > >>http://www.clientcide.com/tools/why-you-should-consider-releasing-code/ > > >> > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Oskar Krawczyk (via Nabble) < > >> > [email protected]<ml-user%[email protected]> > >> <ml-user%[email protected]<ml-user%[email protected]> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > I might have come off a bit too strong in the third message, which I'm > >> > > sorry for - I'm going to have to pull the very-difficult-day card. > >> > > Anyway. > > >> > > As I have mentioned before, I'm willing to participate in creating a > >> > > more comprehensive list of demos, and now that it's clear that the > >> > > Team is also willing to accept code from external sources (the > >> > > community in that case) it feels even more motivating to do so. > > >> > > In regards to, what Aaron mentioned, on Valerio presumably not wanting > >> > > MooTools to be a "designer's framework" – I can empathize with that > >> > > statement/fact, but what makes me wonder tho, is why doesn't he want > >> > > some publicity (these are actually the words of one author I know down > >> > > at Ajaxian). I would presume publicity is always a good thing, yet > >> > > there's so little coming out of the official channels, ie. the Blog – > >> > > sometimes, just to see whether something's going on on the project I > >> > > have to go all the way to GH/LightHouse to check out the latest > >> > > comments from the Core team members. > > >> > > This, again, is not a direct question (or rant, or trolling) but some > >> > > general thoughts that have been wondering up north. > > >> > > Oskar > > >> > > ----- > >> > >http://blog.olicio.us|http://lasttweet.com|http://keepthinking.it > > >> > > On Jan 6, 10:24 pm, nutron <anut...@...< > >>http://n2.nabble.com/user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=2120381&i=0>> > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > Unfortunately I can't help you get started with the demos as I don't > >> know > > >> > > > where these files are anymore. They used to be in the SVN repository > >> but > >> > > > they aren't in the git repository, so you'll have to reach out to > >> valerio > > >> > > > and tom on that stuff. I'll try and get more info from them if I can > >> > > catch > >> > > > them on IM. > >> > > > Regarding the docs, that's an easy one. Well, sorta, if you consider > >> git > >> > > > easy. The short version is you need to fork the mootools 1.2 > >> codebase and > > >> > > > make your edits to the docs. Then check them in an issue a pull > >> request > >> > > to > >> > > > the main repository. After that Tom or Valerio will have to approve > >> the > >> > > > change and then publish it. > > >> > > > As for the web site and the kwiks menu, the current design was very > >> > > > deliberate. I think perhaps (and I am speculating here) it was a > >> desire > >> > > on > >> > > > Valerio's part to assert that MooTools is a developer's framework > >> more > >> > > than > >> > > > it is a designer's framework, and he wanted to make it simple and > >> clean. > >> > > I > >> > > > do miss the kwiks though. I seriously doubt that we'll see a > >> redesign of > >> > > the > >> > > > site in the near future, but I'll of course leave that up to Valerio > >> to > >> > > > comment on. > > >> > > > Aaron > > >> > > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 11:47 AM, csuwldcat-2 (via Nabble) < > >> > > > ml-user+164628-370837...@...< > >>http://n2.nabble.com/user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=2120381&i=1> > >> > > <ml-user%2b164628-370837...@...< > >>http://n2.nabble.com/user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=2120381&i=2>> > > >> > > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > Hey Oskar, > > >> > > > > I love this community of people...but i do feel some of your > >> points > >> > > > > are valid (I hope not one throws a freaking shoe at me for this!). > > >> > > > > 1. First off I wouldn't go so far as to say the docs suck, could > >> they > >> > > > > be better, sure. That said, I would love to help with the docs! > >> There > >> > > > > are at least 10 undocumented options/methods/functions that are > >> > > > > basically easter eggs I have discovered in my few years of use of > >> the > >> > > > > lib. Another thing about the docs I am willing to work on is that > >> > > > > many of the in-docs examples show no use of many of the options > >> > > > > mentioned in the descriptions, the Fx base class is a prime > >> example, > >> > > > >http://mootools.net/docs/Fx/Fx. Now you may say "Fx base is > >> extended > >> > > > > so look to Morph and Fx.Elements"...sorry, not there either. The > >> > > > > upside? We can do this together, just tell me where to write! > > >> > > > > 2. Framework wars maybe childish, but good old fashioned > >> competition > >> > > > > rocks! Think of this as a business guys, the 1.2 site is kind of > >> like > >> > > > > a Ford Pinto with the the engine of a 427 Shelby Cobra, the Buyer > >> > > > > (read User) needs to see some chrome bumpers and hear the kickin' > >> > > > > sound system before buying. The 1.2 site looks are not what I > >> think > >> > > > > needs a hand, but where are the cool menus of 1.1? You can Google > >> > > > > that shit to this day to find Kwicks and Mootools come up like > >> > > > > freaking cult words in reference to the 1.1 horizontal menu. > > >> > > > > 3. I would work to get the demos looking super slick once more, > >> again > >> > > > > tell me where to write! > > >> > > > > Now please for the love of all that is Holy do not post back that > >> I am > >> > > > > a Troll, I help others here when I can and frequently learn a > >> great > >> > > > > deal from the groups (Arron, thanks again for yesterday's help!), > >> and > >> > > > > of course the docs. Trolling is rarely the case when people are > >> > > > > saying they want to help and make things even tighter than they > >> > > > > already are. > > >> > > > > On Jan 6, 10:21 am, Oskar Krawczyk <oskar.krawc...@...< > >> > >http://n2.nabble.com/user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=2119056&i=0>> > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > Guillermo, shouldn't you be filling jQ forums with hater posts > >> like > >> > > > > > this (note the lack of a question mark). > > >> > > > > > People like you, Sir, make me sick when I think about helping > >> the > >> > > > > > community. > > >> > > > > > O. > > >> > > > > > On Jan 6, 5:39 pm, "Guillermo Rauch" <rau...@...< > >> > >http://n2.nabble.com/user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=2119056&i=1>> > >> > > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > 6. Anti-trolling plugin. > > >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Oskar Krawczyk > >> <oskar.krawc...@ > >> > > ...< > >>http://n2.nabble.com/user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=2119056&i=2 > >> >>wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > Indeed, I could spare some time and take care of a few of > >> them – > >> > > not > > ... > > read more »
