Re: Archetypes: A Proposal for the less-configuration future

2006-08-29 Thread Ted Husted
On 8/29/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Oops, this should be -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Archetypes: A Proposal for the less-configuration future

2006-08-29 Thread Ted Husted
On 8/28/06, Jason Carreira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The idea is simple: In most apps, 90+% of actions will fall into one of a few "types" which will have very similar configuration. If we can pull these commonalities out into what I was calling "architypes", then we can just specify which ar

Re: Archetypes: A Proposal for the less-configuration future

2006-08-28 Thread Jason Carreira
> I might be missing some of the context and previous > discussion, but thought I'd chime in anyway... > > I think this is a *terrible* idea. Great for crud > apps, but as a very heavy user of webwork 1 (and 2, > increasingly) purely as a *user*, commands (the ! > stuff) are very very useful. To

Re: Archetypes: A Proposal for the less-configuration future

2006-08-28 Thread Hani Suleiman
I might be missing some of the context and previous discussion, but thought I'd chime in anyway... I think this is a *terrible* idea. Great for crud apps, but as a very heavy user of webwork 1 (and 2, increasingly) purely as a *user*, commands (the ! stuff) are very very useful. They're also v