I''ve been checkin out the new elite snowboarding e-commerce awesome site launched by Tobi, the SnowDevil (at http://www.snowdevil.ca - take a look, it''s beautiful) and just remebered about a good Microsoft initiative (yeah, really, they can get it right sometimes) that they called "starter kits" for ASP.NET. Starter kits are template applications for different areas and it helps you get your app started without having actually to start from scratch. Some of these startup kits target intranet portals, e-commerce sites and project management stuff (take a look at http://www.asp.net/Default.aspx?tabindex=8&tabid=47). So, wouldn''t it be nice to have some Rails starter kits? Obvious areas are e-commerce, blogging, content management, issue tracking, community portals, intranet portals, reporting and others. I know there are already some sample applications in these areas, how about turning them into starter kits? I think these kits could help Rails gain even more mindshare. Who''s up for it? Tobi? DHH? Anyone? I would really like to help make it happen as soon as I finish my masters degree in late february. Rgds, Demetrius
Demetrius Nunes wrote:> > I''ve been checkin out the new elite snowboarding e-commerce awesome > site launched by Tobi, the SnowDevil (at http://www.snowdevil.ca - take > a look, it''s beautiful) and just remebered about a good Microsoft > initiative (yeah, really, they can get it right sometimes) that they > called "starter kits" for ASP.NET. > > Starter kits are template applications for different areas and it > helps you get your app started without having actually to start from > scratch. Some of these startup kits target intranet portals, e-commerce > sites and project management stuff (take a look at > http://www.asp.net/Default.aspx?tabindex=8&tabid=47). > > So, wouldn''t it be nice to have some Rails starter kits? Obvious > areas are e-commerce, blogging, content management, issue tracking, > community portals, intranet portals, reporting and others. I know there > are already some sample applications in these areas, how about turning > them into starter kits? > > I think these kits could help Rails gain even more mindshare. Who''s > up for it? Tobi? DHH? Anyone? > > I would really like to help make it happen as soon as I finish my > masters degree in late february.I think this is an excellent idea! As you may know, I''m working on a One-Click Ruby Server that will install a ruby, apache, mysql, and rails all configured and ready to go. It would be great if I could also include a selection of starter kits to install. Also, the initial One-Click Ruby Server will be for Windows (that''s my platform), but I will be looking for people willing to put together Linux and OSX versions. Curt
Demetrius Nunes wrote:> I''ve been checkin out the new elite snowboarding e-commerce awesome > site launched by Tobi, the SnowDevil (at http://www.snowdevil.ca - > take a look, it''s beautiful) and just remebered about a good Microsoft > initiative (yeah, really, they can get it right sometimes) that they > called "starter kits" for ASP.NET. > > Starter kits are template applications for different areas and it > helps you get your app started without having actually to start from > scratch. Some of these startup kits target intranet portals, > e-commerce sites and project management stuff (take a look at > http://www.asp.net/Default.aspx?tabindex=8&tabid=47). > > So, wouldn''t it be nice to have some Rails starter kits? Obvious > areas are e-commerce, blogging, content management, issue tracking, > community portals, intranet portals, reporting and others. I know > there are already some sample applications in these areas, how about > turning them into starter kits? > > I think these kits could help Rails gain even more mindshare. Who''s > up for it? Tobi? DHH? Anyone? > > I would really like to help make it happen as soon as I finish my > masters degree in late february. > > Rgds, > Demetrius > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/railsI''d really like to get started on this right away, before I even complete my associates. Twitch
Curt Hibbs wrote:>Demetrius Nunes wrote: > > >> So, wouldn''t it be nice to have some Rails starter kits? Obvious >>areas are e-commerce, blogging, content management, issue tracking, >>community portals, intranet portals, reporting and others. I know there >>are already some sample applications in these areas, how about turning >>them into starter kits? >> >> >> >I think this is an excellent idea! > >As you may know, I''m working on a One-Click Ruby Server that will install a >ruby, apache, mysql, and rails all configured and ready to go. It would be >great if I could also include a selection of starter kits to install. >That would certainly be a major plus! Other things that I would like to do after I install the One-click server is: gem install rails-ecommerce or gem install rails-portal And then: rails --kit ecommerce c:\dev\myshop Nice, huh? Demetrius
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 18:44:03 -0200, Demetrius Nunes <demetrius-fDpYTK8McCzCdMRJFJuMdgh0onu2mTI+@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Curt Hibbs wrote: > > >Demetrius Nunes wrote: > > > > > >> So, wouldn''t it be nice to have some Rails starter kits? Obvious > >>areas are e-commerce, blogging, content management, issue tracking, > >>community portals, intranet portals, reporting and others. I know there > >>are already some sample applications in these areas, how about turning > >>them into starter kits? > >> > >> > >> > >I think this is an excellent idea! > > > >As you may know, I''m working on a One-Click Ruby Server that will install a > >ruby, apache, mysql, and rails all configured and ready to go. It would be > >great if I could also include a selection of starter kits to install. > > > That would certainly be a major plus! > > Other things that I would like to do after I install the One-click > server is: > > gem install rails-ecommerce > or > gem install rails-portal > > And then: > > rails --kit ecommerce c:\dev\myshop > > Nice, huh? > > DemetriusI''d like that. What sort of functionality would be in the e-commerce or blog or whatever rails installation?
Joe Van Dyk wrote:>On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 18:44:03 -0200, Demetrius Nunes > > >>gem install rails-ecommerce >>or >>gem install rails-portal >> >>And then: >> >>rails --kit ecommerce c:\dev\myshop >> >> >> >I''d like that. What sort of functionality would be in the e-commerce >or blog or whatever rails installation? >For e-commerce, for instance, there''s always some common ground like shopping carts, product listing and adminstration, orders, customer registration, checkout process and so on. In the starter kit we would have template models and controllers for all sort of these things, as well as the db schema and some graphics. You would then be able to have this conversation with your client: Client calls you: "Hi, I would like to build a e-commerce site for my WeirdStuff store..." You: "Hmmm, ok, hold on just a sec..." ... 1 minute later... You: "Ok, try http://weirdstuffshop.yourrailshosting.com and see what else will you need besides graphics customization." Client: "Damn, you''re good!" :-) cya, Dema
Basic Intranet / portal would be nice. Many public libraries are in desparate need for these, as well as public schools in rural areas. Basic Group Calendaring, File uploads / downloads, wiki (Instiki). I would be interested in helping. Plone2 it doesn''t have to be, but a basic STARTER KIT, would be great ! - Thad Guidry On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 19:06:33 -0200, Demetrius Nunes <demetrius-fDpYTK8McCzCdMRJFJuMdgh0onu2mTI+@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Joe Van Dyk wrote: > > >On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 18:44:03 -0200, Demetrius Nunes > > > > > >>gem install rails-ecommerce > >>or > >>gem install rails-portal > >> > >>And then: > >> > >>rails --kit ecommerce c:\dev\myshop > >> > >> > >> > >I''d like that. What sort of functionality would be in the e-commerce > >or blog or whatever rails installation? > > > For e-commerce, for instance, there''s always some common ground like > shopping carts, product listing and adminstration, orders, customer > registration, checkout process and so on. In the starter kit we would > have template models and controllers for all sort of these things, as > well as the db schema and some graphics. > > You would then be able to have this conversation with your client: > Client calls you: "Hi, I would like to build a e-commerce site for my > WeirdStuff store..." > You: "Hmmm, ok, hold on just a sec..." > ... 1 minute later... > You: "Ok, try http://weirdstuffshop.yourrailshosting.com and see what > else will you need besides graphics customization." > Client: "Damn, you''re good!" > > :-) > > cya, > Dema > > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >
> As you may know, I''m working on a One-Click Ruby Server that will install a > ruby, apache, mysql, and rails all configured and ready to go. It would be > great if I could also include a selection of starter kits to install. > > Also, the initial One-Click Ruby Server will be for Windows (that''s my > platform), but I will be looking for people willing to put together Linux > and OSX versions. > > Curt >While I''m a bit new to it, I''d be more than willing to work on the OSX (and possibly Linux, though my Linux-foo has gotten a bit rusty since I switched to debian). Feel free to contact me off-list with more information.
On 02/02/2005, at 7:06 AM, Demetrius Nunes wrote:> So, wouldn''t it be nice to have some Rails starter kits? Obvious > areas are e-commerce, blogging, content management, issue tracking, > community portals, intranet portals, reporting and others. I know > there are already some sample applications in these areas, how about > turning them into starter kits?That would be fantastic. This is the sort of thinking that reminds me how amazing the Ruby/Rails community is. My preference would be to just start on ONE starter kit with a project leader and some others helping out. I''d be more than happy to nominate myself on some UI/CSS/UX stuff... I haven;t got mountains of spare time, but I can see the importance of this initiative, and will MAKE time :) I believe it''s crucial that we just start with one such kit, with a strong leader, and build it up from there with a focus on uniformity between the kits -- strong naming conventions, best practices, shared libraries for as much of the code as possible, etc. Basically, I think it''s an amazing idea, but it could be done really badly -- let''s make sure it''s done beautifully. --- Justin French, Indent.com.au justin.french-zULN+VWqVOIpAS55Wn97og@public.gmane.org Web Application Development & Graphic Design
Justin French wrote:> On 02/02/2005, at 7:06 AM, Demetrius Nunes wrote: > >> So, wouldn''t it be nice to have some Rails starter kits? Obvious >> areas are e-commerce, blogging, content management, issue tracking, >> community portals, intranet portals, reporting and others. I know >> there are already some sample applications in these areas, how about >> turning them into starter kits? > > > That would be fantastic. This is the sort of thinking that reminds me > how amazing the Ruby/Rails community is. My preference would be to > just start on ONE starter kit with a project leader and some others > helping out. > > I believe it''s crucial that we just start with one such kit, with a > strong leader, and build it up from there with a focus on uniformity > between the kits -- strong naming conventions, best practices, shared > libraries for as much of the code as possible, etc. > > Basically, I think it''s an amazing idea, but it could be done really > badly -- let''s make sure it''s done beautifully.I totally agree. Unfortunately, for me, it will be difficult to lead something like this until late March. But I would be delighted to help if someone else steps up.
Thad Guidry wrote:> Basic Intranet / portal would be nice. Many public libraries are in > desparate need for these, as well as public schools in rural areas. > Basic Group Calendaring, File uploads / downloads, wiki (Instiki). I > would be interested in helping. Plone2 it doesn''t have to be, but a > basic STARTER KIT, would be great !I like this idea. Just a few cents to add from the sidelines: I''m not a Rails developer, but sort of an interested onlooker who -- when time permits -- would like to experiment with it. One of the attractive things about Rails is that it is a fresh start; it comes after the blog/wiki/CMS revolution. I''m of the belief that the separation between wikis, blogs and CMSes, for example, are somewhat artificial. Projects like Drupal and Plone start to make it easier to bring them closer together, but perhaps Rails can do an even better job. If I end up getting to working on a Rails app, it will be what I''ve called a BibBliki: a combination wiki/weblog/bibliographic database. Anything the Rails community can do to make it easier to implement this sort of thing for a newbie would be great. Bruce
As a "graphically-challenged" programmer, I would love to have someone contribute themes as well. Drop in a layout file, a stylesheet, and some images - viola! the look is transformed. If I''m just dreaming, please someone pinch me. Justin French wrote:> On 02/02/2005, at 7:06 AM, Demetrius Nunes wrote: > >> So, wouldn''t it be nice to have some Rails starter kits? Obvious >> areas are e-commerce, blogging, content management, issue tracking, >> community portals, intranet portals, reporting and others. I know >> there are already some sample applications in these areas, how about >> turning them into starter kits? > > > That would be fantastic. This is the sort of thinking that reminds me > how amazing the Ruby/Rails community is. My preference would be to just > start on ONE starter kit with a project leader and some others helping out. > > I''d be more than happy to nominate myself on some UI/CSS/UX stuff... I > haven;t got mountains of spare time, but I can see the importance of > this initiative, and will MAKE time :) > > > I believe it''s crucial that we just start with one such kit, with a > strong leader, and build it up from there with a focus on uniformity > between the kits -- strong naming conventions, best practices, shared > libraries for as much of the code as possible, etc. > > Basically, I think it''s an amazing idea, but it could be done really > badly -- let''s make sure it''s done beautifully. > > --- > Justin French, Indent.com.au > justin.french-zULN+VWqVOIpAS55Wn97og@public.gmane.org > Web Application Development & Graphic Design > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails---------- Scanned for viruses by ClamAV
> One of the attractive things about Rails is that it is a fresh start; it > comes after the blog/wiki/CMS revolution. I''m of the belief that the > separation between wikis, blogs and CMSes, for example, are somewhat > artificial. Projects like Drupal and Plone start to make it easier to > bring them closer together, but perhaps Rails can do an even better job. > > If I end up getting to working on a Rails app, it will be what I''ve > called a BibBliki: a combination wiki/weblog/bibliographic database.This is a good point about Rails being a sort of "post-CMS" era platform. One of the things that Rails and projects like Basecamp and Tadalists seem to be teaching people is the idea of "Less Software." Rails has this philosphy baked in very deeply, and it seems to resonate with people very strongly. It''s rare to read developers say that the way a framework implements caching "is so simple it makes me cry." In fact, I''d suggest that "do less" might be the most valuable thing Rails has to offer to the widest audience. Not "do more with less", but literally "do less." You want to evoke the "so simple it makes me cry" emotion. It''s very tempting to imagine introductory starter kits in the Microsoft model: A complete ecommerce site! A complete CMS! A full-blown bug-tracker! But these projects will need to compete with ASP.NET, Java, etc. *on their own terms and assumptions*, like "bigger is better" or "assume the user wants lots of configuration settings" and so on. IMHO, Rails starter kits should show how to "do less." I admit I don''t have any great ideas for what that means; if simple to-do lists hadn''t been done by Tada, that might be a good example. Another way to look at it: remember the "5k Contest"? (http://www.the5k.org/) It awarded people for the most creative use of 5k of code. What if Rails starter kits proved what Rails could do with, say, 500 lines of code? Andrew
Andrew Otwell wrote:> > Another way to look at it: remember the "5k Contest"? > (http://www.the5k.org/) It awarded people for the most creative use of > 5k of code. What if Rails starter kits proved what Rails could do with, > say, 500 lines of code?This is appealing because relatively small starter kits would be less intimidating and easily understood. Curt
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 06:06:11PM -0200, Demetrius Nunes wrote:> So, wouldn''t it be nice to have some Rails starter kits? Obvious > areas are e-commerce, blogging, content management, issue tracking, > community portals, intranet portals, reporting and others. I know there > are already some sample applications in these areas, how about turning > them into starter kits? >I''m entering into this thread a bit late, but yes! :) I actually added some thoughts to the wiki about something similar to this last weekend: see http://wiki.rubyonrails.org/rails/show/NolansRailsThoughts. A brief summary: Rather than creating large Rails applications, I was pondering using generators to create a set of interlocking, configurable components, some of which could function as individual sites though they could also function as portions of a larger site. For instance, I wanted to design a website for my software company. The site would have three components: a forum, shop and system for entering news on the frontpage. Ideally I would like to integrate the forum and shop such that, as with PHPBB, you could select a city/state/country for your location and have that shown alongside posts . . . yet that could also be used in the shopping cart as components of the billing/shipping address. Designing a larger, integrated, dynamic website would then be a matter of snapping together existing components (I called them "boxcars") then doing any additional fine-grained integration. In my instance, I was thinking of having new actions become available depending on context and current activity. For instance, if the user ordered a product then I might have a "Track order" link appear while the order is being shipped, thus eliminating the need to save and re-enter a tracking number. Ahem, I''m rambling. :) I''m enthusiastic about this project because I didn''t feel up to doing all the code from scratch, and was strongly considering abandoning Rails for Plone. It seems that future Rails components are being packaged as gems, but I haven''t edited the page to take this into account. What I''m really hoping to not see, though, are a bunch of different standalone applications that can''t really be integrated. I don''t know that I have the time or experience to lead such a project, but I''ve definitely got enough time to play an active role, and was pondering tossing up an Instiki on my webserver to start collecting some sort of coherent and structured ideas. Anyone interested in this approach? Designing a set of interlocking components, using some common conventions to allow for either integration or standalone use, then releasing them as gems? Instead of just downloading one massive, monolithic community app, one might instead grab the rails-cms gem, which also requires rails-login, rails-news, rails-forum, rails-skinning, rails-static-page . . . then ties them all together with some cohesive views and helpers.
Every programmer should do themselves a favor and go buy a copy of Robin Williams'' *The Non-Designers Design Book*. Even if you never end up designing anything, you''ll at least have a handle on the concepts. It''s a really fun and easy read: http://tinyurl.com/3jda8 Jamie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Williams" <kevin-P4szbAuRZ8UqDJ6do+/SaQ@public.gmane.org> To: <rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 11:02 AM Subject: Re: [Rails] Rails Starter kits> As a "graphically-challenged" programmer, I would love to have someone > contribute themes as well. Drop in a layout file, a stylesheet, and some > images - viola! the look is transformed. > > If I''m just dreaming, please someone pinch me. > > > Justin French wrote: >> On 02/02/2005, at 7:06 AM, Demetrius Nunes wrote: >> >>> So, wouldn''t it be nice to have some Rails starter kits? Obvious >>> areas are e-commerce, blogging, content management, issue tracking, >>> community portals, intranet portals, reporting and others. I know there >>> are already some sample applications in these areas, how about turning >>> them into starter kits? >> >> >> That would be fantastic. This is the sort of thinking that reminds me >> how amazing the Ruby/Rails community is. My preference would be to just >> start on ONE starter kit with a project leader and some others helping >> out. >> >> I''d be more than happy to nominate myself on some UI/CSS/UX stuff... I >> haven;t got mountains of spare time, but I can see the importance of this >> initiative, and will MAKE time :) >> >> >> I believe it''s crucial that we just start with one such kit, with a >> strong leader, and build it up from there with a focus on uniformity >> between the kits -- strong naming conventions, best practices, shared >> libraries for as much of the code as possible, etc. >> >> Basically, I think it''s an amazing idea, but it could be done really >> badly -- let''s make sure it''s done beautifully. >> >> --- >> Justin French, Indent.com.au >> justin.french-zULN+VWqVOIpAS55Wn97og@public.gmane.org >> Web Application Development & Graphic Design >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rails mailing list >> Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org >> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > > ---------- > Scanned for viruses by ClamAV > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
Hey all, I second that. Robin Williams - not related to the actor - has an excellent grasp on design, and, perhaps even more importantly, explains it lucidly and accurately. *The Non-Designers Design Book*, IMHO, is better than her book on web design. Take it easy, -- David Berube Berube Consulting djberube-SKs4VQuYnI65azolltMz9laTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org (603)-485-9622 http://www.berubeconsulting.com/ Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote:> Every programmer should do themselves a favor and go buy a copy of > Robin Williams'' *The Non-Designers Design Book*. Even if you never end > up designing anything, you''ll at least have a handle on the concepts. > It''s a really fun and easy read: > > http://tinyurl.com/3jda8 > > Jamie > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Williams" > <kevin-P4szbAuRZ8UqDJ6do+/SaQ@public.gmane.org> > To: <rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org> > Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 11:02 AM > Subject: Re: [Rails] Rails Starter kits > > >> As a "graphically-challenged" programmer, I would love to have >> someone contribute themes as well. Drop in a layout file, a >> stylesheet, and some images - viola! the look is transformed. >> >> If I''m just dreaming, please someone pinch me. >> >> >> Justin French wrote: >> >>> On 02/02/2005, at 7:06 AM, Demetrius Nunes wrote: >>> >>>> So, wouldn''t it be nice to have some Rails starter kits? Obvious >>>> areas are e-commerce, blogging, content management, issue tracking, >>>> community portals, intranet portals, reporting and others. I know >>>> there are already some sample applications in these areas, how >>>> about turning them into starter kits? >>> >>> >>> >>> That would be fantastic. This is the sort of thinking that reminds >>> me how amazing the Ruby/Rails community is. My preference would be >>> to just start on ONE starter kit with a project leader and some >>> others helping out. >>> >>> I''d be more than happy to nominate myself on some UI/CSS/UX stuff... >>> I haven;t got mountains of spare time, but I can see the importance >>> of this initiative, and will MAKE time :) >>> >>> >>> I believe it''s crucial that we just start with one such kit, with a >>> strong leader, and build it up from there with a focus on uniformity >>> between the kits -- strong naming conventions, best practices, >>> shared libraries for as much of the code as possible, etc. >>> >>> Basically, I think it''s an amazing idea, but it could be done really >>> badly -- let''s make sure it''s done beautifully. >>> >>> --- >>> Justin French, Indent.com.au >>> justin.french-zULN+VWqVOIpAS55Wn97og@public.gmane.org >>> Web Application Development & Graphic Design >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rails mailing list >>> Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org >>> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >> >> >> ---------- >> Scanned for viruses by ClamAV >> _______________________________________________ >> Rails mailing list >> Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org >> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > > > >
Definitely. I got the Web Design book when it first came out and didn''t care for it. But the 2nd edition of Non-Designers came out recently and is really wonderful. I can at least look at pages and understand what is and isn''t working in terms of design--admittedly at a rudimentary level. But what a difference it makes! Jamie ----- Original Message ----- From: "David J Berube" <djberube-SKs4VQuYnI65azolltMz9laTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> To: <rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 4:15 PM Subject: Re: [Rails] Rails Starter kits> Hey all, > > I second that. Robin Williams - not related to the actor - has an > excellent grasp on design, and, perhaps even more importantly, explains it > lucidly and accurately. *The Non-Designers Design Book*, IMHO, is better > than her book on web design. > > Take it easy, > > -- > > David Berube > Berube Consulting > djberube-SKs4VQuYnI65azolltMz9laTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org > (603)-485-9622 > http://www.berubeconsulting.com/ > > > Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote: > >> Every programmer should do themselves a favor and go buy a copy of Robin >> Williams'' *The Non-Designers Design Book*. Even if you never end up >> designing anything, you''ll at least have a handle on the concepts. It''s a >> really fun and easy read: >> >> http://tinyurl.com/3jda8 >> >> Jamie >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Williams" >> <kevin-P4szbAuRZ8UqDJ6do+/SaQ@public.gmane.org> >> To: <rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 11:02 AM >> Subject: Re: [Rails] Rails Starter kits >> >> >>> As a "graphically-challenged" programmer, I would love to have someone >>> contribute themes as well. Drop in a layout file, a stylesheet, and some >>> images - viola! the look is transformed. >>> >>> If I''m just dreaming, please someone pinch me. >>> >>> >>> Justin French wrote: >>> >>>> On 02/02/2005, at 7:06 AM, Demetrius Nunes wrote: >>>> >>>>> So, wouldn''t it be nice to have some Rails starter kits? Obvious >>>>> areas are e-commerce, blogging, content management, issue tracking, >>>>> community portals, intranet portals, reporting and others. I know >>>>> there are already some sample applications in these areas, how about >>>>> turning them into starter kits? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> That would be fantastic. This is the sort of thinking that reminds me >>>> how amazing the Ruby/Rails community is. My preference would be to >>>> just start on ONE starter kit with a project leader and some others >>>> helping out. >>>> >>>> I''d be more than happy to nominate myself on some UI/CSS/UX stuff... I >>>> haven;t got mountains of spare time, but I can see the importance of >>>> this initiative, and will MAKE time :) >>>> >>>> >>>> I believe it''s crucial that we just start with one such kit, with a >>>> strong leader, and build it up from there with a focus on uniformity >>>> between the kits -- strong naming conventions, best practices, shared >>>> libraries for as much of the code as possible, etc. >>>> >>>> Basically, I think it''s an amazing idea, but it could be done really >>>> badly -- let''s make sure it''s done beautifully. >>>> >>>> --- >>>> Justin French, Indent.com.au >>>> justin.french-zULN+VWqVOIpAS55Wn97og@public.gmane.org >>>> Web Application Development & Graphic Design >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rails mailing list >>>> Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org >>>> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >>> >>> >>> ---------- >>> Scanned for viruses by ClamAV >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rails mailing list >>> Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org >>> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rails mailing list >> Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org >> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >> >> >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
I would agree that the idea of a Rails starter kit may be a bit misguided. Rails requires so little and is so easy to set up and use. I also found your reference to a "post-CMS" era interesting. Are you saying that web programmers shouldn''t have to create a CMS every time the build a new web application, or that we should stop using CMS''s like Plone and Drupal and build everything using an easy-to-use framework like Rails? Andrew Otwell wrote:>> One of the attractive things about Rails is that it is a fresh start; >> it comes after the blog/wiki/CMS revolution. I''m of the belief that >> the separation between wikis, blogs and CMSes, for example, are >> somewhat artificial. Projects like Drupal and Plone start to make it >> easier to bring them closer together, but perhaps Rails can do an >> even better job. >> >> If I end up getting to working on a Rails app, it will be what I''ve >> called a BibBliki: a combination wiki/weblog/bibliographic database. > > > This is a good point about Rails being a sort of "post-CMS" era > platform. One of the things that Rails and projects like Basecamp and > Tadalists seem to be teaching people is the idea of "Less Software." > Rails has this philosphy baked in very deeply, and it seems to > resonate with people very strongly. It''s rare to read developers say > that the way a framework implements caching "is so simple it makes me > cry." > > In fact, I''d suggest that "do less" might be the most valuable thing > Rails has to offer to the widest audience. Not "do more with less", > but literally "do less." You want to evoke the "so simple it makes me > cry" emotion. > > It''s very tempting to imagine introductory starter kits in the > Microsoft model: A complete ecommerce site! A complete CMS! A > full-blown bug-tracker! But these projects will need to compete with > ASP.NET, Java, etc. *on their own terms and assumptions*, like "bigger > is better" or "assume the user wants lots of configuration settings" > and so on. > > IMHO, Rails starter kits should show how to "do less." I admit I don''t > have any great ideas for what that means; if simple to-do lists hadn''t > been done by Tada, that might be a good example. > > Another way to look at it: remember the "5k Contest"? > (http://www.the5k.org/) It awarded people for the most creative use of > 5k of code. What if Rails starter kits proved what Rails could do > with, say, 500 lines of code? > > Andrew > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >
On 06/02/2005, at 1:17 PM, Tom Purl wrote:> I would agree that the idea of a Rails starter kit may be a bit > misguided. Rails requires so little and is so easy to set up and use.But why re-invent the wheel every single time? I agree Rails is a nice fast-track, but some starter kits / generators for common, repetitive tasks (like logins, shopping carts, etc etc) are obviously of value. They will allow newbies to see some good code in working action, reduce bugs and errors and make it even faster to get a skeleton application or wireframe up and running. I can''t see it being of any harm at all.> I also found your reference to a "post-CMS" era interesting. Are you > saying that web programmers shouldn''t have to create a CMS every time > the build a new web application, or that we should stop using CMS''s > like Plone and Drupal and build everything using an easy-to-use > framework like Rails?I''ve long been a believer in writing custom CMSs for my clients, because I can give them exactly what they want with zero bloat. I''ve never installed a Plone or Nuke for anyone (although I have installed a few Textpatterns)... now that Rails is here, it just means that I can deliver those custom CMSs and solutions a whole lot faster. Rails plus a few generators and/or starter kits could give us a whole lot of functionality for "free", which has already been tried and tested. This means that us developers can just focus on the parts of the application that are unique to the client/project, and know that every else "just works". --- Justin French, Indent.com.au justin.french-zULN+VWqVOIpAS55Wn97og@public.gmane.org Web Application Development & Graphic Design
I support the idea of releasing a comprehensive set of starter kits, generators, large examples, and best practices . Anything to help shorten the learning process / dev cycle will be a huge plus for us total newcomers. This doesnt have to be mutually exclusive with showing "how to ''do less.''" I am considering RoR, for a decent sized, fully featured, website/services project but the choice might be a little premature given that I have nearly zero Ruby, Rails, Mysql and CMS experience, and I am probably going to have near zero luck finding experienced Rub/Rails devs here in India, yet. -Rakesh Justin French wrote:> On 06/02/2005, at 1:17 PM, Tom Purl wrote: > >> I would agree that the idea of a Rails starter kit may be a bit >> misguided. Rails requires so little and is so easy to set up and use. > > > But why re-invent the wheel every single time? I agree Rails is a nice > fast-track, but some starter kits / generators for common, repetitive > tasks (like logins, shopping carts, etc etc) are obviously of value. > They will allow newbies to see some good code in working action, reduce > bugs and errors and make it even faster to get a skeleton application or > wireframe up and running. > > I can''t see it being of any harm at all. > >> I also found your reference to a "post-CMS" era interesting. Are you >> saying that web programmers shouldn''t have to create a CMS every time >> the build a new web application, or that we should stop using CMS''s >> like Plone and Drupal and build everything using an easy-to-use >> framework like Rails? > > > I''ve long been a believer in writing custom CMSs for my clients, because > I can give them exactly what they want with zero bloat. I''ve never > installed a Plone or Nuke for anyone (although I have installed a few > Textpatterns)... now that Rails is here, it just means that I can > deliver those custom CMSs and solutions a whole lot faster. > > Rails plus a few generators and/or starter kits could give us a whole > lot of functionality for "free", which has already been tried and > tested. This means that us developers can just focus on the parts of > the application that are unique to the client/project, and know that > every else "just works". > > --- > Justin French, Indent.com.au > justin.french-zULN+VWqVOIpAS55Wn97og@public.gmane.org > Web Application Development & Graphic Design > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
Justin French wrote:> But why re-invent the wheel every single time? I agree Rails is a nice > fast-track, but some starter kits / generators for common, repetitive > tasks (like logins, shopping carts, etc etc) are obviously of value. > They will allow newbies to see some good code in working action, reduce > bugs and errors and make it even faster to get a skeleton application or > wireframe up and running. > > I can''t see it being of any harm at all. > > Rails plus a few generators and/or starter kits could give us a whole > lot of functionality for "free", which has already been tried and > tested. This means that us developers can just focus on the parts of > the application that are unique to the client/project, and know that > every else "just works".This is the idea behind scaffolding. It seems a fine fit with Rails. An upcoming patch extends code generation from models and controllers to entire applications. http://dev.rubyonrails.com/ticket/487 Starter kits sound cool, but remember that Rails is a web application framework, not a content manager, forum, or shopping cart. jeremy
Hi All! I''m BAAAAACK! The Migration of my server platform from the old and stale RH6.2 to the new(er) and fresh(er) BSD5.3, while certainly neither painless nor complete has reached a level of functionality to at least let me bend thine ear yet again :) I gotta weigh in on this thread for a moment here; RAILS is ANYTHING but easy to set up. This is not the fault of RAILS though - has far more to do with general system administration requirements. Its typical of such arcanity: the initiates, having initiated, are so familiar that they casually overlook what is obvious to them but is a toe stubber to the rest of us. I have to say this has more to do with documentation of requirements and expected behaviour than anything else. Starter kits might be overkill, and they might be a bad idea for other reasons (don''t get me started on how ignorance of system archetecture breeds security breaches), but I think that the originator of this idea does recognize a valid problem and potential solution - but I think the solution is perhaps misguided. Just my .02c Thanks fer listenin''! Twitch On Sun, 6 Feb 2005, Justin French wrote:> On 06/02/2005, at 1:17 PM, Tom Purl wrote: > >> I would agree that the idea of a Rails starter kit may be a bit misguided. >> Rails requires so little and is so easy to set up and use. > > But why re-invent the wheel every single time? I agree Rails is a nice > fast-track, but some starter kits / generators for common, repetitive tasks > (like logins, shopping carts, etc etc) are obviously of value. They will > allow newbies to see some good code in working action, reduce bugs and errors > and make it even faster to get a skeleton application or wireframe up and > running. > > I can''t see it being of any harm at all. > >> I also found your reference to a "post-CMS" era interesting. Are you >> saying that web programmers shouldn''t have to create a CMS every time the >> build a new web application, or that we should stop using CMS''s like Plone >> and Drupal and build everything using an easy-to-use framework like Rails? > > I''ve long been a believer in writing custom CMSs for my clients, because I > can give them exactly what they want with zero bloat. I''ve never installed a > Plone or Nuke for anyone (although I have installed a few Textpatterns)... > now that Rails is here, it just means that I can deliver those custom CMSs > and solutions a whole lot faster. > > Rails plus a few generators and/or starter kits could give us a whole lot of > functionality for "free", which has already been tried and tested. This > means that us developers can just focus on the parts of the application that > are unique to the client/project, and know that every else "just works". > > --- > Justin French, Indent.com.au > justin.french-zULN+VWqVOIpAS55Wn97og@public.gmane.org > Web Application Development & Graphic Design > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >
Sorry ladies and gentss, just rebuilt mail server and I gotta test post James
On 2/1/05, Demetrius Nunes <demetrius-fDpYTK8McCzCdMRJFJuMdgh0onu2mTI+@public.gmane.org> wrote:> I''ve been checkin out the new elite snowboarding e-commerce awesome > site launched by Tobi, the SnowDevil (at http://www.snowdevil.ca - take > a look, it''s beautiful) and just remebered about a good Microsoft > initiative (yeah, really, they can get it right sometimes) that they > called "starter kits" for ASP.NET. > > Starter kits are template applications for different areas and it > helps you get your app started without having actually to start from > scratch. Some of these startup kits target intranet portals, e-commerce > sites and project management stuff (take a look at > http://www.asp.net/Default.aspx?tabindex=8&tabid=47). > > So, wouldn''t it be nice to have some Rails starter kits? Obvious > areas are e-commerce, blogging, content management, issue tracking, > community portals, intranet portals, reporting and others. I know there > are already some sample applications in these areas, how about turning > them into starter kits?Did this idea ever catch up? Is anyone still interested in this? Cheers, Ed -- Encontrá a "Tu psicópata favorito" http://tuxmaniac.blogspot.com Thou shalt study thy libraries and strive not to reinvent them without cause, that thy code may be short and readable and thy days pleasant and productive. -- Seventh commandment for C programmers
Edgardo Hames wrote:> Did this idea ever catch up? Is anyone still interested in this?As someone who would like to learn Rails this seems a very good idea!
I don''t think they''re such a great idea for Rails. For Microsoft it works, because there''s not much you can learn from reviewing usual .NET examples (aside from the petshop maybe), so the starter kits are a great way to *learn* many advanced subjects (and I think that''s what they really target those at). Recently I just happened to read an article on the matter on the Visual Studio magazine, where the author says it''s not a good idea to rely to much on these starter kits, because it can get out of hand if you start copying code and implementing it in your own application, and later you''re not really sure how it all fits together. I tend to agree with this. In the case of Rails, since it''s open source and there are lots of full applications coming up every now and then (i.e., RubyForge), I think you could consider that as starter kits. I''ve learned a lot this way. I haven''t seen the actual code of the starter kits of Microsoft, but I bet their documentation is kick ass. This would be a disadvantage for us Railers, because as much as Ruby/Rails document themselves using their inherent beauty, when you''re learning, obvious comments can be helpful. That''s of course, IMHO. Ivan V. Edgardo Hames wrote:> On 2/1/05, Demetrius Nunes <demetrius-fDpYTK8McCzCdMRJFJuMdgh0onu2mTI+@public.gmane.org> wrote: > >> I''ve been checkin out the new elite snowboarding e-commerce awesome >> site launched by Tobi, the SnowDevil (at http://www.snowdevil.ca - take >> a look, it''s beautiful) and just remebered about a good Microsoft >> initiative (yeah, really, they can get it right sometimes) that they >> called "starter kits" for ASP.NET. >> >> Starter kits are template applications for different areas and it >> helps you get your app started without having actually to start from >> scratch. Some of these startup kits target intranet portals, e-commerce >> sites and project management stuff (take a look at >> http://www.asp.net/Default.aspx?tabindex=8&tabid=47). >> >> So, wouldn''t it be nice to have some Rails starter kits? Obvious >> areas are e-commerce, blogging, content management, issue tracking, >> community portals, intranet portals, reporting and others. I know there >> are already some sample applications in these areas, how about turning >> them into starter kits? >> > > Did this idea ever catch up? Is anyone still interested in this? > > Cheers, > Ed > -- > Encontrá a "Tu psicópata favorito" http://tuxmaniac.blogspot.com > > Thou shalt study thy libraries and strive not to reinvent them without cause, > that thy code may be short and readable and thy days pleasant and productive. > -- Seventh commandment for C programmers > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > >
On 10/26/05, i.v.r. <ivanvega-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > I don''t think they''re such a great idea for Rails. > > For Microsoft it works, because there''s not much you can learn from > reviewing usual .NET examples (aside from the petshop maybe), so the > starter kits are a great way to *learn* many advanced subjects (and I > think that''s what they really target those at). Recently I just happened > to read an article on the matter on the Visual Studio magazine, where > the author says it''s not a good idea to rely to much on these starter > kits, because it can get out of hand if you start copying code and > implementing it in your own application, and later you''re not really > sure how it all fits together. I tend to agree with this. > > In the case of Rails, since it''s open source and there are lots of full > applications coming up every now and then (i.e., RubyForge), I think you > could consider that as starter kits. I''ve learned a lot this way. I > haven''t seen the actual code of the starter kits of Microsoft, but I bet > their documentation is kick ass. This would be a disadvantage for us > Railers, because as much as Ruby/Rails document themselves using their > inherent beauty, when you''re learning, obvious comments can be helpful. >Maybe, the starter kits are not needed as a way to learn, but they can be more helpful as a way to sketch quick solutions and to reuse components. Is there any work being done in that direction? What do you think of this? Regards, Ed -- Encontrá a "Tu psicópata favorito" http://tuxmaniac.blogspot.com Thou shalt study thy libraries and strive not to reinvent them without cause, that thy code may be short and readable and thy days pleasant and productive. -- Seventh commandment for C programmers
In that case, I think creating the components themselves would be the most helpful. Then you can create tutorials or examples on how you can integrate those components to build an application. If you built it the other way around, I think it would make the components a little too tightly integrated/dependent. Now that I''m drifting, something like PEAR would be awesome. How about we have our own repository? REAR? Hehe. Well, maybe RAPR instead (Rails Application and Plugin Repo), or PAGER (plugins, applications, and generators for Rails). I know there''s already RubyForge and the RAA, but something more specific and tied to Rails would be better. Maybe the new plugin system will make this possible, we''ll see. Regards, Ivan V. Edgardo Hames wrote:> On 10/26/05, i.v.r. <ivanvega-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > >> I don''t think they''re such a great idea for Rails. >> >> For Microsoft it works, because there''s not much you can learn from >> reviewing usual .NET examples (aside from the petshop maybe), so the >> starter kits are a great way to *learn* many advanced subjects (and I >> think that''s what they really target those at). Recently I just happened >> to read an article on the matter on the Visual Studio magazine, where >> the author says it''s not a good idea to rely to much on these starter >> kits, because it can get out of hand if you start copying code and >> implementing it in your own application, and later you''re not really >> sure how it all fits together. I tend to agree with this. >> >> In the case of Rails, since it''s open source and there are lots of full >> applications coming up every now and then (i.e., RubyForge), I think you >> could consider that as starter kits. I''ve learned a lot this way. I >> haven''t seen the actual code of the starter kits of Microsoft, but I bet >> their documentation is kick ass. This would be a disadvantage for us >> Railers, because as much as Ruby/Rails document themselves using their >> inherent beauty, when you''re learning, obvious comments can be helpful. >> >> > > Maybe, the starter kits are not needed as a way to learn, but they can > be more helpful as a way to sketch quick solutions and to reuse > components. Is there any work being done in that direction? What do > you think of this? > > Regards, > Ed > -- > Encontrá a "Tu psicópata favorito" http://tuxmaniac.blogspot.com > > Thou shalt study thy libraries and strive not to reinvent them without cause, > that thy code may be short and readable and thy days pleasant and productive. > -- Seventh commandment for C programmers > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > >