[Nitro] Facets 2.0 and the World of Bundles

[George Moschovitis]

Tom,

this sounds interesting, but I don't really understand  how this works
from this email. And to tell  you the truth I am quite happy with he
current (1.8) mega-library aproach. However, I would love to see your
new system. Can I download the code somewhere?

-g.

On 3/27/07, transfire at gmail.com <transfire at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi--
>
> Time to reveal my surprise...
>
> I have been working on a small project called GemBundles. Gembundles
> are ordinary gems but they have an extra section for bundling
> dependencies. This allows one to make multi-packages and avoid
> downloading dependencies.
>
> So what's this have to do with Nitro?
>
> For Facets 2.0, I want to spin-off parts of the library into their own
> packages. Now I haven't decided exactly how I want to do this. Either
> the packages will be categorizations of Facets' libs --which will
> still keep the whole rather tight knit, while allowing parts to still
> be used independently if need be. Or the packages will be on their
> own, with their own unique names and development tracks --in which
> case Facets itself becomes just the core extensions and the most
> general of the "more" components.
>
> Now, if the former choice, little changes for Nitro, except that it
> will probably want to ultimately depend on the "facetsbundle" package
> in order to avoid directly handling a dozen or so dependencies at
> installation time.
>
> But if the later, well, things get interesting here. Nitro will want
> to create it's own _special bundle_ containing the various libs it
> requires. This will of course include Facet's core extensions and the
> general components, and some of the independent spun-off packages.
> But, unlike now, Nitro need not include any it doesn't use, AND Nitro
> is at greater liberty to choose dependencies from outside sources
> other than Facets. Going this route, Nitro could in fact name this
> bundle "Glue". How's that for coming full circle?
>
> At this point I have to makes a choice: Should Facets remain the super
> uber-lib, containing nearly any common library under the sun, but
> neatly categorized? Or should I refine Facets to it's most general
> features and spin-off the more specialized parts? There are trade-offs
> to each of course. On the one hand, we have a large comprehensive "one-
> stop-shop" library, well organized, and with high name recognition. On
> the other, we have a variety of libs from which to pick and choose,
> each specialized to a particular need, with independent development
> tracks and announcements. In essence it is a choice of greater
> Uniformity vs greater Flexibility. It's a difficult choice, and I am
> torn between them.
>
> For Nitro that decision basically boils down to whether Nitro prefers
> to depend on one comprehensive mega-library, or would it rather have
> the added flexibility to bundle together a variety of smaller libs at
> it's discretion?
>
> T.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nitro-general mailing list
> Nitro-general at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/nitro-general
>


-- 
http://georgeandstella.com
http://blog.gmosx.com
http://cull.gr
http://www.joy.gr
http://nitroproject.org