[webgen-devel] [TL] some doubts
t_leitner at gmx.at
Wed Sep 19 08:55:51 EDT 2007
From: Thomas Leitner <t_leitner at gmx.at>
Date: 24. August 2007 14:40:34 GMT+02:00
To: Andrea Ferro
Subject: Re: some doubts
On 23.08.2007, at 19:34, Andrea Ferro wrote:
> There can be a mixed approach. I'll study it a bit keeping in mind
> support for multiple instances. And also of multiple threading (but
> my experience with ruby multithreading is not very extensive and
> for what I've experienced robust multithreading is not exactly the
> number one selling point of ruby. And AFAIK Mongrel's own Zed Shaw
> would agree there's room for improvement).
I did not really mean multithreading, but just a separation of
multiple WebSite instances which can run indepently. Just like one
can use several String instances in one or multiple threads.
> The parameter access implementation is another of my doubts. But I
> did not mention it yet. Actually "a facility that automatically
> executes code when a parameters value changes" is not terribly hard
> to do. Think listener.rb, for example. But there's more to
> parameters than adding listener. The problem you are having with
> Node (that really should be Webgen::Node) and it's caching behavior
> may be addressed with listener but I'm not sure that's the very
> best approach. I'll do some reasoning on this too.
Okay, will also think a bit more about this.
>> Concerning documentation: I want to separate developer and user
>> documentation, meaning that a webgen or plugin developer should
>> find everything in the RDoc documentation and the user should find
>> everything he needs in the user documentation generated by webgen
>> and available on webgen.rubyforge.org. I'm still struggling a
>> little bit with the general structure of the user documentation,
>> however, I will try to add a first draft as soon as possible.
> I agree. I've seen there's no user level documentation in devel at
> the moment. It generally is a good idea to keep documentation in
> sync during development. But in this case I think doing our best at
> the "developer" documentation is the priority. In fact I think that
> any actual information that goes in the user docs should also go in
> the developer's docs. User docs may have a different form, have
> examples and tutorials etc. But the "logic" of the system should go
> in both doc sets. That is it should go in the devel docs first and
>> from there when the user docs are being prepared. This is why a
> little delay in preparing user docs is actually allright. After all
> whoever is going to "use" the system before it's released, should
> look at the sources anyway.
There is some user level documentation: I have tried to keep the
plugin documentation current. What I plan is to move some of the
plugin documentation (especially much of the current plugin
documentation for Core/FileHandler) to the general user documentation.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the webgen-devel