Re: [Maypole] (no subject)

From: Marcus Ramberg (marcus at thefeed.no)
Date: Fri Nov 19 2004 - 14:08:00 GMT


Simon Flack wrote:

>On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 10:21:27 +0100, Sebastian Riedel wrote
>
>
>>Funny, in Catalyst we have split the Maypole Request in Context,
>>Request and Response.
>>
>>
>That is very similar to what I have in mind for Maypole. But I don't think we
>need that separation - one request object should be enough. I don't think we
>need that complexity, but I think I understand why you need it for Catalyst.
>Can you use custom context/request/response objects.
>
>

Last week you were complaining that we were doing mean things to Maypole
in the release of Maypole 2.0, this week you are proposing major
architectural changes. Separating the request object from the
"controller" (the application object, imo, Maypole's controller is
actually fused into the model classes, not the request object) is a more
major change than anything that was done for Maypole 2.0. Also, I don't
see the actual problem you are solving. I understand your concerns
regarding the bloat, but this design together with multiple inheritance
is what provides Maypole with it's easy and flexible plugin
architecture. Cleaning up handler_guts seems like a more relevant change.

With regards to making maypole easier to debug, using warn and $r->debug
isn't really the problem either, getting warnings into intelligent
places, and warning people about common mistakes is the real problem.
Introducing a new logging class does not help that. I'm happy to hear
that you want more tests. So do I. That's why I changed Maypole::CLI to
make it easier to write template tests and test the view in version 2.0.

I'd still like to see a maintainer who's dedicated to improving rather
than changing Maypole. After a week with you not even contacting me to
get write access in the repository, and proposing to do major API
changes, you don't seem to have that focus. Maybe you would be better
off working with Sebastian on Catalyst?

Personally I'm trying to finish some Maypole applications in the current
framework at the moment, I think this would be a good path to realizing
what kind of improvements Maypole really needs, and I also feel it would
be very good for Maypole itself to get some finished open source
applications as a showcase.

Marcus

_______________________________________________
maypole mailing list
maypole at lists.netthink.co.uk
http://lists.netthink.co.uk/listinfo/maypole



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Feb 24 2005 - 22:25:57 GMT