[Seaside] Re: [Moose-dev] Re: why Glamour configuration is loading
Refactoring and all the rest?
dhenrich at vmware.com
Fri May 28 17:16:47 UTC 2010
Julian Fitzell wrote:
> Yeah, clearly you should not *have* to load Slime. Nor should you have
> to load the Seaside development tools, examples, etc... The Monticello
> configs need a few more groups I guess.
There are a number of things that could be restructured in Seaside3.0.
For one thing there are several "projects" that are embedded in the
Seaside3.0 Metacello configuration:
Each of these _could_ (should?) be broken out into their own
configuration. Grease, Swazoo2, and Kom are already broken out into
Once that's done you could start creating some groups that carve the
remaining packages into logical chunks...
I will probably start some intensive Seaside3.0 work next week (after
the holiday on Monday:). So that would be a good time to do some
configuration refactoring and group defining...Other than the (obvious
to me) new configs I mentioned above, I don't have an opinion on how the
system should be grouped, so you guys need to make the decisions ...
I'll take your desires and turn them into Metacello definitions.
Possibile groupings would include things like the following (keep in
mind that the minimum loadable chunk in Metacello is a package, so the
groups should be designed to create commonly used groupings without
having to cover all possible combos):
- core without continuations
- core with continuations
- production tools (tools that should be included in production)
- development tools (broader range of tools)
- addons bundle (for things like email, html5, internet explorer)
- separate groups for each each of the Adaptors
I think there are several additional possibilities carving up tests, but
I think that test grouping should be deferred until we've got a firm
grasp on the non-test groupings.
More information about the seaside