Hey Damon,

Nope, it definitely got through. Hopefully I did not accidentally reject
yours the first time (don't think I did) :-O.

That would be epic if you would like to help implement/code this. We really
appreciate the help. :-)

At least we don't have to set this in stone.. but if you want to get things
to a point where there is, say, a ".ripple/hooks/middleware.js" file that
will only get picked up, that is solid too, IMO.

Unless others have different thoughts?


On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Damon Oehlman <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi All - I think the approach where separate files get picked up as
> middleware would work well.  I'm certainly happy to help implement the
> feature also.
>
> Cheers,
> Damon.
>
> PS.  Hoping this message doesn't get rejected like the last one...
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Brent Lintner <[email protected]
> >wrote:
>
> > ..Maybe even ".ripple/hooks/emulate/foo.js" where all files get picked up
> > as middleware (or something similar)?
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > PS: Damon (if you are listening), what are your thoughts? Are you
> > interested in helping us code something like that (if you have time)?
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Brent Lintner <[email protected]
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > I definitely like that idea, too. It could be a solid start to per app
> > > config (in general).
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Gord Tanner <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I like it :)
> > >>
> > >> I am wondering if we clean this up a bit to use a .ripple folder and
> put
> > >> this in a hooks directory and store other ripple configuration in
> there.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Brent Lintner <
> [email protected]
> > >> >wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hey all,
> > >> >
> > >> > Just wanted to create a thread about this PR that is up.
> > >> >
> > >> > Thoughts?
> > >> >
> > >> > It seems like this could be a useful feature for any user(s), and I
> > see
> > >> no
> > >> > reason why it would be negative to the project.
> > >> >
> > >> > Given that, I am wondering if we should pull this in as is (after a
> > >> normal
> > >> > review), and go from there, considering:
> > >> >
> > >> > 1. We are not 1.x.x, and do not have a (documented) stable way of
> > using
> > >> the
> > >> > software or plugging into it. Until then, I think we can have
> features
> > >> > added that could eventually change (and be documented) by then.
> > >> >
> > >> > 2. Gets the feature ASAP in for a user who would actively use it.
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Brent Lintner
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Brent Lintner
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Brent Lintner
> >
>



-- 
Brent Lintner

Reply via email to