I have a quick question on future plans for Rails, as it seems at this point we will be moving forward with plans to use Rails in our next project. What are the plans for future Rails development? We have looked at several different development frameworks ovet the last few months, most are monolithic and attempt to be the do all / end all to web development. Providing built-in abilities to do everything except make your teeth whiter and your breath fresher. We would like to see Rails stay a light, efficent, stable, core. Nothing more. Allow all the Dancing Monkey Icon generators, RSS creation, PDF building, Graphing, XML tranforming, Euro to Dollar conversion engine code be added as componants. This may keep the core of Rails lighter and smaller. It would also allow for the developer to pick and choose what features she or he enables, and even which version/authors of enabled features are to be installed. This link the ROR site gives me high hopes that this will be the road Rails follows. Am I correct in this assumption? http://www.loudthinking.com/arc/000407.html Thanks, DAve
On Jun 6, 2005, at 9:53 AM, DAve wrote:> We would like to see Rails stay a light, efficent, stable, core. > Nothing more. Allow all the Dancing Monkey Icon generators, RSS > creation, PDF building, Graphing, XML tranforming, Euro to Dollar > conversion engine code be added as componants. This may keep the > core of Rails lighter and smaller. It would also allow for the > developer to pick and choose what features she or he enables, and > even which version/authors of enabled features are to be installed.RAils Is Less Software. You''re in the right place. jeremy
> RAils Is Less Software. You''re in the right place. > > jeremyIf you need pdf building, image manipulating, xml transforming, text formatting, etc, just install (or write) the appropriate ruby gem. -- rick http://techno-weenie.net
These things won''t be added to rails. Each component in rails does one thing and does this task well. Additionally, as always, i''d like to point out that if you like a certain release especially well you can use it till the end of days. Nothing in the future will make release 0.12.1 work less then it does now. On 6/6/05, DAve <dave.list-+JIuMJIPudMuIF41do6k7w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> I have a quick question on future plans for Rails, as it seems at this > point we will be moving forward with plans to use Rails in our next project. > > What are the plans for future Rails development? > > We have looked at several different development frameworks ovet the last > few months, most are monolithic and attempt to be the do all / end all > to web development. Providing built-in abilities to do everything except > make your teeth whiter and your breath fresher. > > We would like to see Rails stay a light, efficent, stable, core. Nothing > more. Allow all the Dancing Monkey Icon generators, RSS creation, PDF > building, Graphing, XML tranforming, Euro to Dollar conversion engine > code be added as componants. This may keep the core of Rails lighter and > smaller. It would also allow for the developer to pick and choose what > features she or he enables, and even which version/authors of enabled > features are to be installed. > > This link the ROR site gives me high hopes that this will be the road > Rails follows. Am I correct in this assumption? > > http://www.loudthinking.com/arc/000407.html > > Thanks, > > DAve > > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >-- Tobi http://www.snowdevil.ca - Snowboards that don''t suck http://typo.leetsoft.com - Open source weblog engine http://blog.leetsoft.com - Technical weblog
> We would like to see Rails stay a light, efficent, stable, core.Our motivations are aligned, then. Rails has from day one aimed to stay clear of both business logic and unrelated infrastructure. We intend to stick to that. -- David Heinemeier Hansson http://www.loudthinking.com -- Broadcasting Brain http://www.basecamphq.com -- Online project management http://www.backpackit.com -- Personal information manager http://www.rubyonrails.com -- Web-application framework
David Heinemeier Hansson wrote:>> We would like to see Rails stay a light, efficent, stable, core. > > > Our motivations are aligned, then. Rails has from day one aimed to stay > clear of both business logic and unrelated infrastructure. We intend to > stick to that. > --Thank you Jeremy, Rick, Tobias, and David for your answers. This is exactly what we hoped we would hear. DAve
On 6/7/05, DAve <dave.list-+JIuMJIPudMuIF41do6k7w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Thank you Jeremy, Rick, Tobias, and David for your answers. This is > exactly what we hoped we would hear.Yeah, I tend to feel that way a lot regarding the things I hear about Rails. :-) -- Regards, John Wilger ----------- Alice came to a fork in the road. "Which road do I take?" she asked. "Where do you want to go?" responded the Cheshire cat. "I don''t know," Alice answered. "Then," said the cat, "it doesn''t matter." - Lewis Carrol, Alice in Wonderland
> Please, what do you mean by "unrelated infrastructure" ?"pdf building, image manipulating, xml transforming" all qualify as unrelated infrastructure to me. String formatting less so since that''s a lot about what templates do. So TextHelper#truncate is related infrastructure and thus a good fit. Business logic is stuff like authentication, permissions, content management, and the likes. -- David Heinemeier Hansson http://www.loudthinking.com -- Broadcasting Brain http://www.basecamphq.com -- Online project management http://www.backpackit.com -- Personal information manager http://www.rubyonrails.com -- Web-application framework