Le 18/4/15 20:04, Yanni Chiu a écrit :
On Apr 18, 2015, at 2:18 AM, stepharo <steph...@free.fr> wrote:
I found strange that not a single little improvements of Magritte was necessary
for the Qude project.
It’s not strange to me, because when working with Magritte 2, it seemed that
almost everything I wanted to do had a hook method to override, or an obvious
place to subclass or extend. So much so, that when I could not find the
extension point, I thought it was my fault. What was missing was instance-based
descriptions, which was added by the community in Magritte 3.
:)
Given how well-factored Magritte 2 was, my deduction was that a lot of effort
had already been done to extract out an open-source artefact, from whatever
system drove it’s development. So, no surprise that few improvements to the
core Magritte were needed.
Ok so we have perfect software. Good to know.
Now if heavy users of open-source libraries do not enhance these open-source
libraries and keep their extensions
under close source then the open-source libraries will never make progress and
I will immensely sad.
Given that Magritte is already well-factored for extensions, what tends to be
written is exactly the custom code which you would not be releasing to
open-source.
but you see I did not use magritte since long time. It would be great to
have example of custom-code.
For example are relationships any useful.
However, there might be a case for add-ons, such as Twitter Bootstrap support.
As mentioned in another post, changing the Magritte API/interfaces at this
point is tricky, because it would affect current users - that’s the conundrum:
success and wider adoption will constrain the evolution.
We have versions to help there.
The addition of instance-based descriptions was worth the (minor) pain of the
transition, but what level of pain would be tolerable to add Bootstrap support,
especially if you’re not using Bootstrap.
But we are talking about SeasideMagritte here?
I do not know because I do not have experience.
I was talking about magritte.
