2012/7/9 Scott L. Burson <[email protected]> > On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Leslie P. Polzer <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Since interest on Weblocks has picked up recently it's appropriate that I >> write about what I have in mind for it. >> >> There are my opinions after working with Weblocks for a couple of years. >> >> Weblocks has a lot of bloat and too strong coupling in it, and also many >> leftovers. Much of it is just not practical. >> >> My proposals: >> >> * Create small components with their own systems, e.g. weblocks-base, >> weblocks-stores, weblocks-forms, weblocks-continuations... >> > > I don't object to this, but I don't think it's very important. Sure, > there's lots of stuff in the current Weblocks that I'm not using, and I > suppose I could care about the memory consumed by these components, but I'm > sure it's minuscule by modern standards. (There are lots of other > Quicklisp systems that are being loaded as dependencies, and I'm not even > sure I'm actually using all of them. This is where I'd start if I were so > concerned about image size.) > > >> * Decouple these components so that you don't have to deal with >> store-dependent stuff when you want to roll your own data storage >> mechanisms. >> > > I'm not familiar with these issues since I'm happy using the CLSQL store. > > >> * Get rid of continuation stuff. It's not a common tool, it's a tool that >> has its merit in special situations but is difficult to understand for >> beginners, and difficult to debug for experts. >> > > I like using flows. I've used a number of small flows in BountyOSS. I > admit, it took me a while to be completely comfortable with them, but I am > now and wouldn't want to lose them. I think some of the difficulty could > be avoided with better documentation. I'll write more about this soon. > > >> * Provide sane versions of dataform and gridedit that don't depend on >> stores and are easily customizable. I already have a good dataform >> substitute. >> > > I haven't yet had a chance to study form-widget, but dataform has done > everything I've wanted so far. > > >> * Get rid of Prototype and Scriptaculous in favor of JQuery. >> > > This, I think, would be a huge improvement. I have to qualify this a > little because I haven't looked closely at what Prototype and Scriptaculous > are capable of; but I see how much momentum jQuery has, including a vibrant > plugin ecosystem, and it does seem to be the way to go. > Here is my developments of it, core system works with replacement of this small library. Probably some widgets don't work with it. https://github.com/html/weblocks-jquery
> > >> * Provide good template support. >> > > Huh, that's a surprise. I thought one of the best things about Weblocks > was that it doesn't use templates. Anyway, there's already 'with-html' -- > what more does anyone need? > > >> * Get rid of the test suite. Try to write a frontend-based testing >> mechanism (I probably won't do this). >> > > A frontend-based testing mechanism would be particularly great if it could > be easily adapted to testing sites. I haven't done anything about > automated testing for BountyOSS, but I will obviously need to at some > point. (I don't think it's my biggest problem quite yet, but it's looming > larger.) > I used selenium in my projects. I think it would be superfluous to include it in weblocks. > > If anyone has any other useful ideas or is interested in helping, please >> chime in. Thanks! >> > > I have more little features and bug fixes in my GitHub fork. i'll be > sending more pull requests soon. > > I think that if Weblocks is to become more popular, its most urgent need > is much better documentation. Maybe I can help with this at some point... > not that I have much time. > > -- Scott > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "weblocks" 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/weblocks?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "weblocks" 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/weblocks?hl=en.
