btw... google groups is closing... does anyone knows what is gonna
happen with this email group??

On Aug 19, 2:02 am, ncubica <ncub...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Please somebody from the prototype dev core team answer us!!!!!!! we
> love prototype, but is dying!!!
>
> On Aug 18, 7:57 pm, Brian Williams <brianw1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > that's  very good point, Phil.
>
> > I've been reluctant to say anything on this, but maybe another voice will
> > take a step closer to an action.
>
> > Recently Prototype lost one of its largest "clients" -- Magento.  Starting
> > with v2.0 Magento will be using jQuery.  This is a big blow to the
> > framework, imo (I've been doing steady Magento work for the past 2.5 years)
> > and nearly every single frontend person I have worked with has made jQuery
> > into working in Magento to get the animation effects that they want, etc.
>
> > It seems that everyone wants something more from this framework -- forking
> > is *always* an option -- look at Kohana -- started as a fork of Code Igniter
> > because CI didn't have things some people wanted.  Now look at FuelPHP -- a
> > fresh new php5.3 based framework based on CI, Kohana with a dash of RoR
> > thrown in.
>
> > If there are people with the knowledge and the desire and the experience to
> > say fork-it and go, I say more power to you -- just make sure you map it out
> > and plan strategically, and where ever possible make it somewhat backwards
> > compatible.
>
> > Also, if you could get away from that whole $ magic function (say put it
> > inside a wrapper?) -- that would make a LOT of frontend devs happy and dump
> > a lot of confusion and headaches for some people.
>
> > Of course just 2 cents from someone who really sucks at JS and is beyond
> > inactive in the community, so feel free to ignore me.
>
> > On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Phil Petree <phil.pet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I believe this is the 3rd time this subject has been brought up in the 
> > > past
> > > year and, to my knowledge, devs have made no comment nor provided any
> > > direction so, as they say, no answer is an answer!
>
> > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 1:20 PM, shellster <shellsterd...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > >> Well written.
>
> > >> As an opensource developer (aside from my day job), I am aware of the
> > >> danger of caring too much about what the user thinks.
> > >> I am also aware of the potential dangers of forking a project.
>
> > >> What I want is some sort of answer from the Prototype devs on how they
> > >> want the community to pitch in.  Do they want us to develop our own
> > >> plugin websites, or do they want us to create an interface for their
> > >> main site?  Do they want to develop it?  Do they want us to develop a
> > >> comprehensive library as an extension of Prototype or as part of
> > >> Prototype?  Will they ever official endorse such efforts (assuming
> > >> certain obvious caveats)?  Unfortunately, it seems that the devs don't
> > >> care to provide any feedback on any of these issues.  I am not
> > >> expecting anything more from the devs, but as a matter of courtesy I
> > >> would like them to explain how they would like us to get involved
> > >> instead of users just doing their own thing.
>
> > >> Also, the answer of "submit a patch for consideration" doesn't really
> > >> cut it in this case, because I've personally seen patches never get
> > >> acknowledged, let alone get added.  I've yet to see a patch get
> > >> added.  Users aren't going to waste their time writing and cleaning up
> > >> code, if there's not at least a good chance of their patch being
> > >> considered.
>
> > >> In short PrototypeJS needs to address these questions before the
> > >> project either falls into disuse or the users take matters into their
> > >> own hands and strike out willy-nilly and fully fork the project.
>
> > >> On Aug 17, 8:04 am, Phil Petree <phil.pet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > This is the same old discussion that's been going on for months and I
> > >> wonder
> > >> > if it will ever get resolved to the satisfaction of those of us who use
> > >> the
> > >> > tool to enhance our sites.
>
> > >> > From what I can tell, there seems to be an uber-geek philosophy of 
> > >> > "make
> > >> it
> > >> > better and they will come" and, to a degree that's correct. The problem
> > >> is,
> > >> > history is filled with technically superior products that ultimately
> > >> failed
> > >> > because of poor marketing and/or not listening to their users (betamax
> > >> vs
> > >> > vhs and myspace vs facebook for two glowing examples).
>
> > >> > My fear is that prototype will ultimately face the same fate...  be a
> > >> > technically superior product with a few guys pitching in and carrying
> > >> the
> > >> > weight (anyone who follows this feed knows who the guys are who always
> > >> pitch
> > >> > in with an answer) while marketing, support, easy access to developed
> > >> libs
> > >> > and all the other goodies go ignored which causes adoption of the
> > >> product to
> > >> > dwindle because these things exist on another platform.
>
> > >> > Why is this important?  I have a buddy that has a very successful site
> > >> > written in cold fusion, he developed the site just to familiarize
> > >> himself
> > >> > with the language.  Turns out, the site took off, he quit is day job,
> > >> ran
> > >> > the site, and recently got a contract for heaps and tons of $$$ for the
> > >> > site.  The catch?  He has to rewrite the site in either .php or .net
> > >> because
> > >> > the buyer won't take it as a CF site.
>
> > >> > Does anyone want to end up with a site that, when its time to sell, 
> > >> > will
> > >> be
> > >> > told, "that's all great but we're a jquery shop so you have to get rid
> > >> of
> > >> > prototype... nobody uses that anymore!"
>
> > >> > From a product standpoint, I'm sure the developers have their hands 
> > >> > full
> > >> and
> > >> > they do a really great job delivering a product that, for the most
> > >> > part, takes us away from browser level coding in a reliable and
> > >> consistent
> > >> > manner. Personally, I am extremely appreciative of their efforts and I
> > >> hope
> > >> > they keep up the good work!
>
> > >> > We all know what the but is... But I do think they need to set some
> > >> > community direction and allow the product to grow.
>
> > >> > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 8:11 AM, shellster <shellsterd...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > > I'm seriously considering building my own site to start adding things
> > >> > > like community documentation, additions to prototype, and plug-ins.
> > >> > > While the Prototype Dev's certainly don't owe me anything, I've been
> > >> > > pretty disappointed in there response time to user requests and even
> > >> > > submitted patches.  I think if someone were to essentially "fork" the
> > >> > > project (me), but still give prototype all the credit it deserves, it
> > >> > > might be the best thing for the community.  If I could generate 
> > >> > > enough
> > >> > > community buzz, and add a bunch of well written features to 
> > >> > > prototype,
> > >> > > perhaps then, the devs would start pulling some of the changes back
> > >> > > into prototype's core.
>
> > >> > > On Aug 13, 4:43 pm, Cantrelle Vincent <vcantre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > > > Hi all,
>
> > >> > > > I'm happy to see that the topic is not dead and that some ideas are
> > >> > > > coming out ...
> > >> > > > (too much work sometimes)
>
> > >> > > > @Sander: maybe I'm missing something (sorry in this case), but do
> > >> you
> > >> > > > have finally any answer (from Prototype's side) concerning your
> > >> email
> > >> > > > your decribed on th 20 Jul ?
>
> > >> > > > Regards
> > >> > > > Vinc.
>
> > >> > > --
> > >> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > >> Groups
> > >> > > "Prototype & script.aculo.us" group.
> > >> > > To post to this group, send email to
> > >> > > prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com.
> > >> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > >> > > prototype-scriptaculous+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> > >> > > For more options, visit this group at
> > >> > >http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.
>
> > >> --
> > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > >> "Prototype & script.aculo.us" group.
> > >> To post to this group, send email to
> > >> prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com.
> > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > >> prototype-scriptaculous+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> > >> For more options, visit this group at
> > >>http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.
>
> > >  --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > "Prototype & script.aculo.us" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > prototype-scriptaculous+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> > > For more options, visit this group at
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Prototype & script.aculo.us" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
prototype-scriptaculous+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.

Reply via email to