I think we'd all love to see Prototype be more popular, but does it
really matter? It's here, it works, it works well and it's a great
base on which to build complex apps. If the developers decide to not
make any more upgrades we'd still have a great tool. I think of it as
a house foundation and what I build on top is the house itself. If
the guy that laid the foundation decided to retire, it doesn't affect
my house. I can always add on to my foundation or find someone that
I still can't understand why tools like Prototype are free. I'd pay a
yearly fee for it. If enough of us did, then perhaps the author(s)
could make a living from it. But, seeing as they aren't, we can't
expect them to upgrade Prototype endlessly for no money. We all need
to earn a living.
Having said all that, what I'd like to see in Prototype is A-just
keeping it up to date with new browser technology, and B-a way to make
it play better with others. I know jQuery has a no-conflict mode, but
it would be nice if we didn't conflict in the first place. Maybe a
way to assign $ to some other name.
To make Prototype more popular I think that we can't expect the
Prototype developers to do all the work. There's a lot of great stuff
out there built on Prototype but what I find frustrating is the time
it takes it make it look/feel like the rest of my stuff. That's not a
Prototype issue. I think if all that code were better organized and
managed it would move Prototype forward. For instance: if we had
volunteers who could project manage, do good design/CSS work, design a
framework that allowed 'widgets' to share a common base/communicate,
program, establish standards and so on, then with some effort we could
have a great tool with great add-ons. Imagine how simple things would
be if all Prototype widgets shared the same CSS classes and usage.
I'm willing to be a part of such a group.
On Sep 2, 11:10 pm, Phil Petree <phil.pet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm going to violate one of my personal rules about responding to posts when
> I have had a glass or two of wine (or, in this case, margharitas):
> What has been sticking in my head from Andrews response are these two
> phrases (in quotes):
> > Prototype's development over the past few years has been typified by a
> > few months of inactivity, then a furious week of activity,* "and I doubt
> > that will change anytime soon*."
> > So don't read anything into the periods of inactivity. "*I don't have
> > any plans to stop working on Prototype*."
> What I read in to this is that Andrew has said he is not "planning" on
> ceasing development anytime soon BUT plans change and when something else
> takes his attention away, then development will cease.
> Now, it could be like my own forms generator... I don't write code for it
> every day. In fact I only upgrade it or fix a bug when I need a new feature
> or I find a bug (no one else has reported any). If that's the case then I
> understand but then I might use my form generator to crank out a few forms
> but I wouldnt build a business that depended on my supporting that product
> for the next 'x' years.
> I think what I and others were looking for was some form of commitment... a
> commitment to moving the community forward was a commitment to prototypes
> future and I am left with the feeling that prototypes future is uncertain.
> Andrew, this isn't a personal attack, I just need to speak frankly and
> honestly because I personally own my own sites and I write the code behind
> them. If I invest tons of time in a framework like prototype then I am
> hitching my star to yours. If you quit working on prototype then I am left
> with some major rewrites and those rewrites are not trivial and in one case
> could cost lives.
> I am still left not knowing which way to turn.
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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at