Thank you for all the info John and Kenneth.
We'll check ruote-kit for our integration with ruote 2.0.

Best regards.
Gonzalo.



On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Kenneth Kalmer <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2009/11/3 John Mettraux <[email protected]>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 8:36 PM, Gonzalo Suarez
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > What are the differences between ruote-http and ruote-kit?
>> > We would like to find the best way to move from ruote-rest (ruote
>> > 0.9.x) to ruote 2.0 engine + rest wrapping.
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> ruote-kit is the one to watch for now. Kenneth is the leader for that
>> project, ruote-http is much less ambitious, it's mostly an exercise
>> for me, centered around how the HTTP interface should be. We intend to
>> have the same interface, but ruote-kit will be the serious one, while
>> ruote-http is only serious about the interface (it shares with
>> ruote-kit).
>
> Hi Gonzalo
>
> John is spot on here. I'm using ruote-http as the interface for the JSON
> side of ruote-kit, and building the UI on my own accord. John also needed to
> experiment ahead of time to ensure the engine exposes some conveniences for
> use in ruote-{http|kit}.
>
> I'll be pushing hard on the code in the coming weeks cause I need it for our
> production environment as well as a client's.
>
> Best
>
> --
> Kenneth Kalmer
> [email protected]
> http://opensourcery.co.za
> @kennethkalmer
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
you received this message because you are subscribed to the "ruote users" group.
to post : send email to [email protected]
to unsubscribe : send email to [email protected]
more options : http://groups.google.com/group/openwferu-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to