> Forge should also include slapping a "Moo Dev Approved" sticker on > plugins/addons that are created for -more or never were in -more but > are created by a Moo dev team member or are supported by (one of) the > Moo dev team. Approved add ons should follow the code style guide > (important imo) and the original devs (either with support of more dev > team members) should support upcoming mootools releases etc.
That would make a lot of sense, especially for the ex-more Classes. > > /end rant #2 > > On Sep 26, 12:09 pm, Rolf -nl <[email protected]> wrote: >> I think it depends quite a lot on the type of project you're working >> on that decides (for you) what kind of things you use. E.g. for an >> application/cms I see myself using Mask, HtmlTable, Lang, Date, URI >> (from Oskar's list) and other times I'm using Fx and Position type >> stuff. So.. you should probably ask 200 people first to make a top 10 >> list before you can really say what can and what can't be dropped >> imho. >> >> It's up to the downloader as well either just clicking "select all" >> for -core and/or -more that starting working with Moo even if you have >> stuff you don't use. If it's too many kb's, someone eventually can or >> will come back and create a new download with only the stuff they need >> for that particular project. And if they don't, that's fine too, it's >> not like that is the responsibility of MooTools. >> >> My idea of -more is/was that it should provide a set of extras on top >> of core that could be considered basic necessities to start building >> regular website of application like stuff instantly. (I think the >> MooScroller could fit into that category as plenty of people look for >> something like this "as soon as" they create overflowing divs with a >> scroller.) >> If you're looking for extra functionality, other ways of doing it, >> improved/enhanced versions, etc. you can checkout the Forge (which you >> should do anyway!). Maybe some Forge plugins could actually be moved >> into -more over time. E.g. something that has to do with storage or a >> smart Validator extension, or extras like Loop or simpleDelay, or... >> hmm this could turn into a problem! ;) >> >> You can promote Forge more if you drop -more, move everything to the >> Forge and create a page where you can click like a set to download. >> Like "This is what More would have been" and then it would collect all >> plugins that were previously in -more. These could be marked with some >> "Original Moo Dev Team plugin" so you kinda know what to expect, which >> I think is good for newcomers and hell, everyone else too really. >> >> As far as promoting the Forge and stuff on it would be a monthly blog >> post with a list of tested and highlighted plugins. Like David Walsh >> is doing every now and then, but focussing on Forge and what More Dev >> Team members consider interesting. These could be really simple string >> enhancing methods or some Class extension so it wouldn't take too much >> time, but I fully understand nobody really has time :) Maybe just a >> month blog post with 10 or less randomly selected added plugins from >> the last month (if there are more, just add a link to Forge). No >> review, just the names + short description entered by the uploader to >> get the word out. Good for newcomers, good for ppl not visiting Forge >> every week, good for other sites that pick up the blog. An editor >> could verify if some plugins aren't really suitable to add etc. this >> is trivial. >> >> /end Forge rant >> >> Hmm, I think leaving everything as is will be fine until 2012 ;) >> >> On Sep 26, 9:54 am, אריה גלזר <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >>> you can always get statistics from the more builder.... >> >>> On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Christoph Pojer >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>>> btw. just saying that the docs do not (just) reflect the usage but >>>> also the complexity of such plugins. So a more complex plugin might >>>> get more hits on the docs than a less complex one. >> >>> -- >>> Arieh Glazer >>> אריה גלזר >>> 052-5348-561 >>> 5561
