So... if Peter really wants to make his mark, can he at least try to keep the API the same or compatible with Prototype.
After over 12 months of investment, the barrier to migrate with a major code change to another library would be daunting. In any case it would need to be something with some muscle behind it (by that I mean, contributers, funding, third-party certification). No matter how good the code is, unless I have some degree of certainty that the next version of IE will not break it we cannot commit. Our product is based on a long life-cycle. That is we are not a boutique that can quickly pick the technology du jour. Deco P.S. My admiration of WebObjects On Nov 30, 2006, at 12:51 PM, Andrew Kaspick wrote: > > Not to side with anyone, but as has been stated many times before, a > lot of feature improvements, bug fixes for prototype seem to sit in > trac without much acknowledgement or feedback. > > Thomas is very good with Scriptaculous (as well as helping with > prototype), but I don't think I've ever seen a single post from Sam > and that does hurt prototype in it's own way. Some of you obviously > disagree and hey, think what you like. > > I myself have posted a few questions regarding issues with prototype > and never received any feedback on it. I'm not going out to build a > new javascript lib myself, but it can be discouraging. > > This is a spinoff list and Peter is spinning off his own lib. If it > succeeds, great, if it fails then lesson learnt. > > Instead of knocking Peter down, why not let him be (it's open source, > he can do what he wants) or suggest ways to improve the dialogue > between the prototype maintainers and it's users. > > My 2c, > Andrew > > On 11/30/06, Mark Holton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Agree, and well said. >> >> >> On 11/30/06, David Zülke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> The term "FUD" has unfortunately been overused in the Rails >>>> world as a >>>> catch all to deflect unwanted criticism. I think this could only be >>>> detrimental to the improvement of Rails, Prototype and >>>> Scriptaculous. >>>> >>>> To make criticism concrete here are a few examples. >>> >>> [snip] >>> >>> Why the hell don't you do what open source is about and >>> contribute to >>> prototype and make an effort to eliminate the flaws you found. >>> Starting your own project to fix concrete drawbacks in another open >>> source project is utter nonsense. >>> >>> >>> David >>> >>> >>>>> >>> >> > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" 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/rubyonrails-spinoffs?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
