+1 to all that David Costa wrote in response. Magnus *has and does*
kept things solid and on track in a way that suits Camping. We're
never going to go head-to-head in the framework competition stakes
(bit late for that anyway, with frameworks swerving all over client-
side dev).
As for encouraging new users - not actively trying to pull them in
(madness :-) - providing a Camping-specific deployment platform as a
visible part of the public face of Camping is a MASSIVE positive
(thanks David: I've been merrily using it after losing too many days
hacking my live servers). A simple deployment guide for the various
common scenarios (shared hosting, cloud, VPS) as part of the book
would round off the experience - I'd be more than happy to edit and
collate that.
The 'small is beautiful' and refreshingly globally diverse Camping
community works for me, and I wouldn't want much more mail from the
list than I get now :-) although it's a great evolutionary drive
whenever there's an activity spike and things get aired in public...
Magnus does a good job (look at the GitHub commits), Jenna took on the
challenge of a new website, and others can support and add to those
very concrete contributions (as Sean did recently with the book), but
I'd never want anyone to feel obliged or get too concerned about
promotion - that's just not relaxed enough for Camping (it's the
little wheels, remember :-)
Any framework is going to have limitations, the question is: are these
becoming a *real* problem (if so, which one is the #1 candidate for
change), or are they to be accepted as part of the character of the
framework?
DaveE
For now I'm feeling like a pretty bad "maintainer". I'm not using
Camping enough to see where things need to be fixed, I'm crappy at
actually shipping stuff, and I'm not sure if I believe that Camping is
a correct starting point for a new framework
Hey Magnus! I think that you are a great maintainer as you kept
Camping in good standing and bug free. That is more than enough :)
I would agree the camping as a starting base for a new framework
might not be ideal. As far as I know Camping was not intended to
compete with rails (or anything else)
but was more of a small, learning framework and given that _why did
so many projects for beginners and education purposes this would fit
in this category I think.
It doesn't mean that camping is not cool or not as good as other
frameworks bur, for what I can see, the initial idea was to have
something simple and quick.
There are so many frameworks e.g. even the core of Ramaze (https://github.com/Ramaze/innate
) available to build other frameworks. But does the world really
need a new framework ? :)
In honesty I think that if someone wants to do that it should either
provide the coding power or be sure that Magnus buys into the idea
and is willing to code that as per your idea.
For me the current camping is sufficiently good in *most* cases but
of course not all...no framework really is and there is no silver
bullet. I don't think it would be something bad if anyone would say
"hey for this project I prefer Sinatra as it does the job in a
different/more elegant way than camping".
What I think camping misses is more marking/visibility to attract
more users and volunteers. Or what do you think ? Is camping at the
moment complete as it is and the future code side would mostly be
focused on bug cleaning/maintenance ?
Best Regards
David
_______________________________________________
Camping-list mailing list
Camping-list@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/camping-list
_______________________________________________
Camping-list mailing list
Camping-list@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/camping-list
