[Nitro] Facets More & Glue

zimba.tm zimba.tm at gmail.com
Fri Feb 10 13:06:24 EST 2006

I'm favorable to include all the facet in nitro's repository because it's the 
only project I know that uses it. It will also allow use to make facet and 
nitro fit together well.

Then I wish that we move facet_core to facet and facet_more to calibre, 
integrate the generic parts of glue into calibre and non-generic in each 
project (nitro or og). According to the glue source code it doesn't seem too 
complicated to do. I'm thinking of "property" and "configuration" for 

I also think that the Gen package is a good idea but that we don't have the 
time to develop it. So while it's in beta, we could just leave it in the repo 
but remove the dependency and use nitrogen instead.

On Friday 10 February 2006 18:38, Michael Fellinger wrote:
> Hey Trans,
> Well, i'm not happy about the idea of having Glue (wich should be exactly
> what the name is - the glue between nitro/og/facets) being used for that.
> It sounds more like an idea that will force us later to remove them again
> and to outsource what not really fits in there.
> However, we all also followed the various attempts to get facets in a nice
> shape, with the main-problem being that nobody wants to have a big
> dependency but on the other side as much as possible around when it becomes
> neccesary, on the other hand you also never want to require something you
> don't need, just because it has something you need.
> based on that many changes have been made so far - making everyone
> stumbling upon yet-another-concept of how facets works.
> I don't say it was bad, but far from optimal - not blaming you, because you
> just tried to figure the best way out, despite of many attacks on
> ruby-lang.
> Now, the best thing we can do is finding a final solution - basically
> splitting it into two projects doesn't seem like a bad idea... this is how
> i saw it from the very beginning and how i thought of it.
> i am on the other hand not fond of having even more dependencies - how nice
> gems that might handle - at the moment we have:
> nitro, og, glue, facets, facets_core, facets_more, gen, glue, breakpoint,
> daemons, (sqlite3, psql, mysql, kirbybase, mongrel, redcloth)
> the last ones are of course optional, and i'm not sure about daemons
> anymore, they were neccesary a while ago.
> Now, splitting facets into two projects would _decrease_ the number of
> dependencies by one! :)
> So, the last thing is that they should have a twinny, rhyming name,
> facets_core facets_more doesn't sound bad - but the names don't say
> anything about what they contain...
> Right now i cannot come up with something better, but i'm sure other people
> can do it.
> Also i'm sorry about that lengthy post, i am a fan of summaries and just
> wanted to complete the picture a bit.
> ~~~~manveru
> Am Saturday 11 February 2006 01:57 schrieb TRANS:
> > Well, since George is around. I'm going to go ahead and put this out
> > there.
> >
> > This whole ordeal with Facets Core/More/Nano/Mega/Carats/Calibre crap
> > has just taken its toll on me. I have spent months trying to firgure
> > out a resaonble solution. There doesn't seem to be one. The mess
> > arises out of a complex mixture of circumstance, namely the
> > fundamental distiction between the natures of the core and more parts,
> > plus the way Ruby itself handles libraries, plus how setup.rb works to
> > distribute them, and how RubyGems works to do the same. Taken all
> > together it makes for a very ugly organization requiring extra special
> > Rakefile tasks and/or Gemspecs to weave things together properly
> > depending on the chosen dev layout. I have tried many posibilites over
> > the last few months, and I think they all suck. I've even wrote a
> > script that would change how Ruby requires libraries in light of it,
> > but I realize that's an utterly worthless endevor*.
> >
> > So George wants to me to move Facets into the Nitro repository and
> > make it an offical part of the Nitro project. I'm all for it. But I
> > hesitate to do so until the problem is satisfactorily resolved.  But
> > as I've said I no longer think there is a solution. That leaves only
> > the possiblity that core and more should be two separate projects. I
> > never wanted that, but I don't see any way around it. But I also don't
> > wan't to to introduce another dependency into Nitro (not least of
> > which reasons is b/c no name for said project has ever been
> > satisfactory either). So right now I'm thinking the solution is to
> > take the More part of Facets and merge it into Glue. Then Facets
> > itself would just be the core extension methods. The only problem I
> > have with that is that ideally these classes, modules and frameworks
> > should be completely _generic_ (i.e usable without Nitro/Og), but some
> > of the stuff in Glue currently only works in conjuction with Nitro/Og.
> > Maybe that's not really a big deal, but it should at least be given
> > consideration.
> >
> > T.
> >
> > *Politics within the Ruby community being what they are.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Nitro-general mailing list
> > Nitro-general at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/nitro-general
> _______________________________________________
> Nitro-general mailing list
> Nitro-general at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/nitro-general


weblog : http://zimba.oree.ch

More information about the Nitro-general mailing list