[Seaside] About Seaside 3.0
ssastre at seaswork.com
Mon Jul 14 13:55:44 UTC 2008
Very interesting thread. I see very good ideas came from Ramon also healthy
focus on Phillipe and Lukas. Bill has a puntual need that is not hard to solve
Regarding to Seaside I think we are entering in a consolidation stage.
We dont have to feel pushed to innovate all the time. Even when just for fun or
"Less is more" said Rohe who made lots of "factorizations" to clean other design
About documentation: a perfect setup kind of how to (like the ones you use for
linux distros apache and such) for a basic seaside app can be illuminating for
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: seaside-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> [mailto:seaside-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] En nombre
> de Norbert Hartl
> Enviado el: Lunes, 14 de Julio de 2008 05:50
> Para: Seaside - general discussion
> Asunto: Re: [Seaside] About Seaside 3.0
> On Sat, 2008-07-12 at 18:10 +0200, stephane ducasse wrote:
> > Hello guys
> > I was driving under the rain during 4 hours and my brain was
> > wandering...
> > I got to think on what would be the most important point
> for Seaside 3.0
> > Here is my thoughts: may be I'm totally wrong but I watched
> some of
> > the Ror stuff and
> > we have to learn from them.
> > - Better and more ready to use components.
> > - Straightforward and dead simple to use for dummies like me
> > persistency.
> > I think that as a community we should pay attention that
> this is not
> > because
> > we will be technical superior we will survive (even if 2.8 and 2.9
> > cleans are cool - lukas
> > and philippe know that I think that they did an EXCELLENT job).
> > Now I'm thinking for the next step that could really blow away the
> > rest of people
> > not thinking that Seaside is coooool.
> Now that I read the thread as whole I have a question. What I can read
> is people having lots of enhancements in mind they want to see in
> seaside. And there are seaside developers which are trying to
> keep the
> "pollution" away from seaside :) The most enhancements would fit
> quite good in a complete web application stack. So why aren't we
> creating such a web application stack (call it "lido")?
> To summarize I read arguments:
> - things that are good ideas but that don't belong into seaside
> - help for setup of things like apache
> - useful components
> - persistency integration
> That sounds exactly like a thing that wraps around seaside. A thing
> - pollutes itself with helper classes to e.g. create apache set ups
> - incorporates persistency and glue code (Glorp, Gemstone, ...)
> - that builds a bunch of useful components
> - that integrates a concept that is native to RoR people but not
> to smalltalkers: "conventions"
> So, why not put the "dirt" into a stack and let the modules be clean?
> Having one-click images for the most wanted uses cases could lower the
> barrier for new users once more. And I don't think we need much more
> code because everything is there already. Building a stack would focus
> a lot more on integrating the different parts and so make it
> easier for
> seaside mailing list
> seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
More information about the seaside