On 26/02/09 05:58, somebody called Mark Glossop (li...@cueballcentral.com)
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:   Radiant@radiantcms.org
Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/
Site:   http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant

Reply via email to