On 26/02/09 05:58, somebody called Mark Glossop ([email protected]) wrote this:
> Hi all - first time poster here [didn't want to hijack the thread about > Dreamhost, so started a new one...I have a very specific question, related to > the OP about Dreamhost.] > > It's good to be hearing this about Dreamhost now, especially when I'm looking > to deploy this weekend. Only started with Radiant about a week ago. Doing my > dev work on local box, and have been a little concerned about the sorcery that > it may take to get everything moved over onto Dreamhost's "special" > environment. I'm deliberately doing all the dev locally since that's how I'm > used to doing Rails dev work; no developtestduction here! :-) > > Anyhow - this whole issue brought something back to me...something that > initially made me steer away from Radiant as a CMS when I was looking around > at various CMS options. I liked Radiant, but didn't like the way it was > packaged up. Evidently that's not enough of a reason for me to _not_ use it, > but the question remains: > > Why is Radiant delivered as a gem with "all the dependencies included"? Or, > put another way, why is it not delivered as a Ruby gem with external gem > dependencies, that generates a "standard" Rails app structure when invoked? > > Some clarification (please note, all of the following are IHMO): > * Some much larger apps [Redmine comes to mind] don't use this approach and > are actually simpler to deploy than Radiant. Really. > * Yes, I know "standard" isn't exactly well-defined AFA Rails is concerned. > * "gem unpack" is not a valid answer/workaround. > * The closest rationale I have found for this question is in the Radiant FAQ - > "Gems: Versions of any required libraries are built-in. So that means that you > don't need to have the rails gem installed: the radiant gem comes bundled with > a particular version." > * It also makes it harder to consider contributing code to Radiant. > > Apart from my own curiosity, my business partners will want to know why I have > chosen Radiant for the CMS I am working on. This info helps me with them. > > If the full reasoning behind this design decision is already online somewhere, > please just point me there, as my Google-fu has obviously not been working. > Thanks! > > Cheers, > Mark *bump* Sorry to nag, but - anyone? Bueller? In case this was somehow regarded as trollbait, I'm asking this as a legitimate query...it really is quite important for me to know, and time is a factor for me ATM. To summarise the above verbiage: Why is Radiant delivered with all dependencies included? TIA for any and all responses. If you'd prefer to respond off-list, please feel free. Regards, Mark __________________________________________________ Mark Glossop - lists <AT> cueballcentral <DOT> com _______________________________________________ Radiant mailing list Post: [email protected] Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
