On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 9:32 AM, Emanuel Carnevale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 10/10/08, Seth Thomas Rasmussen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 8:33 AM, Guoliang Cao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> > IMHO eventually shoes will >> > have to offer more controls like menu, tree, table/grid etc. >> >> >> Why? >> >> I believe the idea is for Shoes to stay tiny. You are certainly free >> to implement these widgets, though. >> >> I've thought at times about a RubyGems like system for sharing widgets >> and other extensions or addons for Shoes apps. Ultimately I think >> RubyGems is exactly that system, no need to add layers of complexity. > > Seth, same thoughs here :) > > even though _laces_ instead of gems for calling Shoes WIdgets would have > been a cool idea :) > > there is a problem though: > > gems are for ruby and you could put dependencies on them, but you cannot put > Shoes as a dependence... and inevitabily without this check things could be > broken.. > > what do you think?
I don't really see it as a problem. People could name the gems starting with "shoes-" if they think that would help clarify where they are meant to be used. Clear documentation would also be a fine solution. -- Seth Thomas Rasmussen http://greatseth.com
