Few weeks ago I was thinking about a similar feature for WebHelpers. Maybe a way to go is to create a ext namespace that would work like third party services and everyone could release this utilities. I'm sure everyone has some snippets in helpers that could solves somebody else's problem. Just a thought.
About the 1.0beta and dropping legacy code, that makes sense. If you need rails package, stay behind, if you dont, move to 1.0. On May 24, 4:45 am, Mike Orr <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Ben Bangert <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On May 23, 2009, at 4:26 PM, Jorge Vargas wrote: > > >> The net today is full with services we pull and mix and match between > >> our sites. > >> - Google ads > >> - google analitics > >> - youtube, vimeo, embed tags > >> - other site specific tags > >> - post to reddit,digg,etc buttons > >> - RSS buttons > >> - etc. > > >> So why not pack all those little snippets into a library? > > >> This ideas occurred to me and I want to know if people are already > >> doing it, and if it's worth adding it to webhelpers or even releasing > >> it as an addon package. > > >> what do you guys think? > > > It makes sense to me. I don't think they'd be very large, so I'm > > inclined to think this would be part of WebHelpers? Or I suppose it > > could be a new little package called 'social helpers' or something, to > > indicate its for all the various common social tidbits people throw on > > websites. > > They might fit into WebHelpers if we define more precisely what they > would be. Functions that produce HTML and Javascript? Would they be > framework neutral or specific to Pylons? > > We could make a module or package for cloud services. My first > thought would be to put each provider in a separate module, although > that might lead to lots of tiny modules. But at this point each > provider is pretty much unique. I would veer toward those that make > an attempt at interoperability (via OpenSocial, GData, etc), but those > may not be what users need (e.g., some users need to tie specifically > to YouTube because it's the biggest). > > Another question is whether WebHelpers could keep up with the changing > providers. Would we end up in the situation we were in earlier with > Javascript libraries, where we pick one and then another one eclipses > it? > > On another note, I'm putting together a WebHelpers 1.0 beta, and > thinking this is a good time to delete webhelpers.rails and the other > deprecated packages. Would that seriously ruin anybody's day? You > can stick with the 0.6 series if you need them, and I don't think the > Pylons dependency needs to change since easy_install should > automatically pick the latest version, but you would still be able to > downgrade without running afoul of the dependencies. > > -- > Mike Orr <[email protected]> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" 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/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
