[Nitro] Newbie Impressions

arne at arnebrasseur.net arne at arnebrasseur.net
Fri Jun 15 03:49:28 EDT 2007

Hi Dan,

Manveru, Jonathan, George and I had a discussion on IRC yesterday about
the state and future of Nitro. George has put an awful lot of work in it,
and a lot has been done since 0.42, but he seems to have the feeling he's
a bit on his own getting little outside help. It's all a bit of a sad
situation. The repo version looks really good but needs polish and specs.
The gem version is getting outdated so we really should work on getting
0.50 out. That would give us a solid base to move forward from.

I have committed myself to write the specs (rspec), Jonathan will review
them. George will finish the examples, and if we pull this off and release
a decent 0.50 he has said to release some other nifty stuff related to

That said I personally also feel docs would be very important. I believe
this community would've been a lot bigger and more vibrant if the barrier
to entry would have been lower thanks to decent documentation. But I'm
gonna work on the specs first, since they should form a good starting
point for anyone writing docs.

If G could bring back the wiki it would still be a valuable tool, for both
developers and users, but I'm very fond of wikis so I'm biased :).

To anyone listening : please give the repo version a shot (darcs get
http://repo.nitroproject.org). The API will probably not change much till
0.50. (That is correct, is it George?) So now is the time to hunt for
those bugs, however small. Let us know what problems you encounter. If
some people don't have darcs access I will try to set up a daily snapshot
of sorts. Just make yourself known on the list.

Thank you for listening.


> Hi George.
> I would suggest keeping the wiki public, and then think about locking it
> down if it gets abused (which is unlikely).
> DHH did a very smart thing in the run-up to Rails 1.0, which was that he
> committed to "not break the book". In other words, the RoR book - which
> was published to coincide with the 1.0 release - would be the reference
> point and the development team would not break compatibility with
> anything in it. After 1.0 he was free to move things forwards again, but
> it made the statement that he was fairly happy with the shape of the
> framework.
> I think you would gain a lot of momentum with Nitro if you (and some of
> the more enthusiastic writers!) were to start documenting how you think
> Nitro should be used, and then committing to "not break the wiki", sort
> of thing.
> Cheers,
> Dan
> ps. You will also find that some people will self-select as "wiki
> gnomes", keeping the place tidy and making sure the content is
> reasonably consistent. I don't know where they come from, but I have
> eternal respect for them.
> George Moschovitis wrote:
>>     there used to be a Nitro wiki, wich I personally think would be
>>     fantastic.
>>     Oxywtf is great to have, but there's something organic about wikis
>>     that
>>     just can't be found elsewhere.
>> I will bring back the wiki. I am not sure though, should I make the
>> wiki writeable by everyone? or give write access only to selected
>> members of the community. Moreover, we would need some guidelines, ie
>> how to organize this wiki. Can anyone in this ml suggest a good set of
>> guidelines?
>> -g.
>> --
>> http://phidz.com
>> http://blog.gmosx.com
>> http://cull.gr
>> http://www.joy.gr
>> http://nitroproject.org
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

More information about the Nitro-general mailing list