[Nitro] Fwd: [Facets] Lay me out 2.0

George Moschovitis george.moschovitis at gmail.com
Mon Sep 10 04:04:09 EDT 2007


Personaly I am not that interested in backwards compatibility. But I do
expect that the 2.0 API will stay frozen for a long time. The constant
changes are not good for this project.

Moreover, I do not think that there is an easy way to offer backwards
compatibility. I would suggest that you do not 'pollute' the facets
2.0directory with backwards compatibility code. Whoever wants to use
the old
API should use the older gem.

thank you,
George.

On 9/9/07, TRANS <transfire at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Trans <transfire at gmail.com>
> Date: Sep 9, 2007 6:57 AM
> Subject: [Facets] Lay me out 2.0
> To: facets-universal at rubyforge.org
>
>
> I'm just about ready to release version 2.0. I have only one last
> major decision to make, and it is an important one. So I thought it a
> good idea to put it out to the community.
>
> As you know, Facets 1.8+ is laid out between facets/core/ and facets/
> more/ subdirectories. There is also a facet/ shortcut directory that
> simply contains files that redirect back to the first two. The idea
> being that the extension method libs were in core/, the other libs in
> more/, and facet/ was for convenience.
>
> With Facets 2.0 there are two points that make things different:
>
> 1) A goal of 2.0 was to make all the libs directly available via
> facets/, without the need for core/ or more/ or redirection.
>
> 2) The extensions are no longer stored one-file-per-method, but are
> instead bundled with other closely related methods. However, Facets
> will still provide per-method requires via redirection files.
>
> So those two points change things a bit. To take them into account,
> the current 2.0 layout looks like this:
>
>   lib/facets/  <-- all libs
>   lib/facet/  <-- method redirects
>
> Unfortunately this layout almost completely breaks backward-
> compatibility with 1.8.
>
> Is there a remedy? I could offer backward compatibility if I did this
> instead:
>
>   lib/facets/core/  <-- method redirects
>   lib/facets/more/ <-- additional libs
>   lib/facets/xore/  <-- extension libs
>
> Yes, the xore/ is a bit weird (do you have a better name?), but it
> keeps with the flow. With this layout I can use RubyGems' libpath
> specification parameter to add more/ and xore/ to the load path and
> achieve my first goal while remaining backward compatible with 1.8.
>
> The problem though, is that _manual_ installs have no means of
> automatically adding to the load path. So those will need a special
> file that would either have to be loaded at the start of ones app or
> added to the RUBYOPT environment variable.
>
> Is that extra hassle worth it?
>
> And, with regard to require statements, how important is backward
> compatibility to you?
>
> Thanks,
> T.
>
> _______________________________________________
> facets-universal mailing list
> facets-universal at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/facets-universal
>
>
> --
> O  trans
> ^^ transfire at gmail.com
>
> If there's one thing I learned from watching sitcoms it's this:
> whenever someone abruptly says "don't be silly", by all means be
> silly!
> _______________________________________________
> Nitro-general mailing list
> Nitro-general at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/nitro-general
>



-- 
http://www.me.gr
http://phidz.com
http://blog.gmosx.com
http://cull.gr
http://www.joy.gr
http://nitroproject.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/nitro-general/attachments/20070910/96d567a0/attachment.html 


More information about the Nitro-general mailing list