On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Stefan Bodewig <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2010-06-28, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 6:04 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> The RAT repository might certainly a place to go.
>
>> I don't know if I have the appropriate commit bits.  Should I just try
>> and see what happens?   (In other words, should I take your comment as
>> permission to start committing there?)  :)
>
> That wouldn't work, your karma won't be sufficient.  If you have an
> intial code base it may be best to attach it to a JIRA issue and have
> one of the people with commit access get it in - I'm sure we'll get the
> rest resolved from there 8-)
>
>>> But, beg your pardon, what's so "heavy-weight" with RAT? I can't see
>>> any advantages of a Python implementation, other than it would be
>>> preferrable to Python developers.
>
>> In our discussion, Robert and I observed that improving and extending
>> RAT as it is today can be quite a chore.  He explained the origins of
>> RAT as "and experiment in software architecture" and that it had
>> horribly gone wrong.
>
> I must admit I never looked any deeper into RAT's core than I needed.
> Overarchitected might be true.  But looking at it from the POV of
> somebody who extended RAT for the Ant integration, all it took are two
> Java classes and about 300 lines of code, most of which are glue code
> for Ant and not RAT.  Doesn't sound too bad to a Java developer. ;-)
>
> Currently I don't think people are not improving/extending RAT because
> it was overengineered but because nobody has an itch bad enough that it
> would need scratching.
>
>> mouse is an attempt to greatly reduce the amount of code needed to
>> accomplish that mission, and be much easier to extend down the road.
>
> Let's see it.
>
> I'm still not sure what type of extension you are talking about in the
> first place.

I've put a rough-not-yet-functioning codebase up in labs:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/labs/mouse/

The architecture is there, but the functionality isn't.  I'm going to
improve it over the next couple of weeks.

-Hyrum

Reply via email to