Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
David Crossley wrote: > If we give people too much rope, then they can hang > themselves. ... and we'll get caught in their noose trying to maintain the code base ... -- Ferdinand Soethe
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote: > Ross Gardler wrote: > > >I'm sorry that you took my original mail as being criticism of your > >excellent work. It was not intended as personal comment, only > >reassurance to Gregor that his concerns were, in my opinion, unfounded. > > it seems the community is now tackling the concerns that i had, which is > very good. Thanks Gregor, i reckon that your concerns were appropriate. Cocoon was very careful to ensure that the sitemap did not enable too much "programming". We need to be always on the lookout. If we give people too much rope, then they can hang themselves. --David
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
Ross Gardler wrote: Again, this is not meant as a criticism, it is an observation. I made the observation because Gregor had clearly found himself in the middle of one of these *seemingly* complex examples and it was ringing alarm bells for him. He was quite rightly asking should he turn them off or was there a real issue. The example in question is: http://apache.org/forrest/templates/1.0"; xmlns:logic="http://apache.org/forrest/logic/1.0";> This has a "logic" namespace, I believe it is that namespace that started alarm bells ringing. The term logic implies there is programming in this config file. Now I do know enough about views to know you are not doing programming in their config files, but Gregor (I assume) does not know this yet. I was trying to reassure him, but in the process I seem to have upset you. Sorry. indeed, the logic in there was a large part of my alarm bells. i brought this up because there has been a lot of talk about plugins / lenya resource types and how they could interact / share, and views seem to be a crucial part for this (very desirable) feature. i wanted to make sure views solve more problems than they create ;) I'm sorry that you took my original mail as being criticism of your excellent work. It was not intended as personal comment, only reassurance to Gregor that his concerns were, in my opinion, unfounded. it seems the community is now tackling the concerns that i had, which is very good. -gregor
Re: [OT] Come on Preston!!! (Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language))
On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 10:04 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: > Thorsten Scherler wrote: > > On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 21:33 -0500, Antonio Gallardo wrote: > > > >>On Dom, 29 de Mayo de 2005, 21:15, David Crossley dijo: > >> > >>>Well said Ross, you express yourself well even when drunk. > >> > >>+1 > >> > >>Perhaps we need to send him more beers? ;-) > >> > >>Seriously, it was a very nice answer! I liked it much. > >> > > > > > > +1 > > > > Sorry for being such a pain in the a*++. > > > > I will answer the thread after work by taking your observations to > > another topic. > > > > > > Well you guys just took away my hangover, now I can go watch my local > Football team in the Play-Off finals for a place in the Premiership. > > Come on Preston!!! > > ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_div_1/4591287.stm ) > > Ross +1 Go preston. ;-) ...best against hangover is another beer. ;-) It is on me. ;-) salu2 -- thorsten "Together we stand, divided we fall!" Hey you (Pink Floyd)
[OT] Come on Preston!!! (Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language))
Thorsten Scherler wrote: On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 21:33 -0500, Antonio Gallardo wrote: On Dom, 29 de Mayo de 2005, 21:15, David Crossley dijo: Well said Ross, you express yourself well even when drunk. +1 Perhaps we need to send him more beers? ;-) Seriously, it was a very nice answer! I liked it much. +1 Sorry for being such a pain in the a*++. I will answer the thread after work by taking your observations to another topic. Well you guys just took away my hangover, now I can go watch my local Football team in the Play-Off finals for a place in the Premiership. Come on Preston!!! ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_div_1/4591287.stm ) Ross
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
Sorry! On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 11:16 +1000, David Crossley wrote: > Thorsten, stop! We already said a while ago that we love your work > with views. We also said that we cannot afford for our attention > to be distracted at this stage. We agreed to work towards getting > the 0.7 release finished before we can concentrate on views. > The problem is that only a few committers are helping to get the > release finished. Those delays are now causing pressure. > > --David -- thorsten "Together we stand, divided we fall!" Hey you (Pink Floyd)
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 21:33 -0500, Antonio Gallardo wrote: > On Dom, 29 de Mayo de 2005, 21:15, David Crossley dijo: > > Well said Ross, you express yourself well even when drunk. > > +1 > > Perhaps we need to send him more beers? ;-) > > Seriously, it was a very nice answer! I liked it much. > +1 Sorry for being such a pain in the a*++. I will answer the thread after work by taking your observations to another topic. > Best Regards, > > Antonio Gallardo > salu2 -- thorsten "Together we stand, divided we fall!" Hey you (Pink Floyd)
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
On Dom, 29 de Mayo de 2005, 21:15, David Crossley dijo: > Well said Ross, you express yourself well even when drunk. +1 Perhaps we need to send him more beers? ;-) Seriously, it was a very nice answer! I liked it much. Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
Well said Ross, you express yourself well even when drunk. Would the next poster please start a new thread for any design issues that spring from this. --David
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
Thorsten Scherler wrote: I really thought whether or not to answer this thread. Well I said I was going to answer this tomorrow, but there is no way I will sleep thinking that I have left this unaddressed so here goes (I hope the alcohol doesn't make things worse ;-)... On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 11:39 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: Thorsten Scherler wrote: On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 18:20 -0400, Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote: ... are you suggesting that it is easier to learn and use a DSL than to use java? i don't buy that, sorry. the DSL is just a layer of indirection, the real implementation (at least in lenya, dunno about forrest) will be java classes anyway, so why not try to have a sensible API rather than hide it behind a bunch of xml? That user that do not have to learn java to extend and use lenya/forrest. They want to configure and not program. I think it is important to understand that at present only Thorstens eyes have touched most of the views plugin (that is why it is in the whiteboard). Last time another dev was able to find the time to understand what Thorsten was doing we ended up simplifying a rather complex XML structure to a really simple one that did the same job, far more efficiently. ¿? Are you talking about Diwaker Gupta? If so then what you wrote is not true! I added CSS support to then decide to get rid of it again. No I wasn't talking of Diwaker Gupta, however you are right to mention him as he has been active in examining and discussing some aspects of views. My apologies for overlooking his contribution, even if it has not been implemented, it has been valid discussion. What I *was* referring to was our discussions on how to include feeder output in a view: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=forrest-dev&m=111217134219139&w=2 In which we went from: http://m11.btefnet.net/torrents/backend.xml http://sourceforge.net/export/rss2_projnews.php?group_id=96589 To a nice clean and more understandable: /feeds/somefeed.xml Admittedly some of the information in the original is in the feeder plugin config rather than the views config, but both configs are much more understandable and we successfully separated the concerns of the view designer and the content designer. My intention in raising this point was not to say that your designs are not good, but to say that we have found that they *are* good and when we (all the Forrest devs) put our heads together we can really polish what you have done. ...and about which complex structure are you takling about? What I am saying is that when you examine an example from Thorsten in the mailing list it tends to be hugely complex. ¿? I simply meant that sometimes your examples are too complex for others, who are lacking your background in the development of views. This is not a failing of yours, it is a failing of *ours* (mine?) because we (I?) are not currently able to find the time to discuss the examples with you as we did in the above thread. ...again do you consider the fv markup as complex? It contains in the core 2 basic tags: forrest:hooks (will be transformed in div) and forrest:contracts (which is a capsuled piece of code from the former site2xhtml.xsl). When you explain it like that it sounds wonderful, but a complex language need not have many elements. It can have a few elements used in many contexts. However, that is not the problem I have perceive, at least I don't think so. The problem I have can be seen in the example above. Look at your first stab at the config file. It contains information relevant to two different types of Forrest user, the content designer (the feeder config stuff) and the views designer (the contracts, hooks and properties). This makes it *appear* complex to the uninitiated reader. Again, this is not meant as a criticism, it is an observation. I made the observation because Gregor had clearly found himself in the middle of one of these *seemingly* complex examples and it was ringing alarm bells for him. He was quite rightly asking should he turn them off or was there a real issue. The example in question is: http://apache.org/forrest/templates/1.0"; xmlns:logic="http://apache.org/forrest/logic/1.0";> This has a "logic" namespace, I believe it is that namespace that started alarm bells ringing. The term logic implies there is programming in this config file. Now I do know enough about views to know you are not doing programming in their config files, but Gregor (I assume) does not know this yet. I was trying to reassure him, but in the process I seem to have upset you. Sorry. I *really* do not understand what is complex. On the other hand to create a new skin I consider complex and inflexible. You have to get into 2
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
Thorsten, stop! We already said a while ago that we love your work with views. We also said that we cannot afford for our attention to be distracted at this stage. We agreed to work towards getting the 0.7 release finished before we can concentrate on views. The problem is that only a few committers are helping to get the release finished. Those delays are now causing pressure. --David
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
Thorsten Scherler wrote: On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 16:02 +0200, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: Thorsten Scherler wrote: ... On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 11:39 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: ... So in conclusion, I agree with Gregors concerns, but I also agree with the direction Thorsten is trying to go in. Actually that is the reason why I am proposing that forrest is *not* officially developing views anymore. Please reconsider. You are getting unnecessarily carried away by your emotion. Don't mistakenly read mails as if they were personal complaints when they are not. Ok, I did not meant to do that but it seems I did. Sorry! I was *not* *recommending* it but was *offering* to do so because I thought that is maybe the best for forrest. Thank goodness it is "an offer", that implies we have a choice, my choice is to not accept your offer. We need views, but we (the other devs) need to spend more time understanding it. (as promised I will explain my original comments when I have a clearer head). Ross
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: Thorsten Scherler wrote: ... On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 11:39 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: ... So in conclusion, I agree with Gregors concerns, but I also agree with the direction Thorsten is trying to go in. Actually that is the reason why I am proposing that forrest is *not* officially developing views anymore. Woaa It's very late for me now, I've had many beers and a bottle of wine so I am not about to try and sort this mess out now. However Thorsten, please listen to Nicola Ken's very wise words below (inparticular the first part - "please reconsider". I'll explain my original comments in detail tomorrow - for now I hope it is enough to say you have misinterpreted the intent of my mail. Ross Please reconsider. You are getting unnecessarily carried away by your emotion. Don't mistakenly read mails as if they were personal complaints when they are not. ... I do not see that it get accepted better said it is causing confusion and concerns by user. Let me be brutally honest with you, as you are being so too with this mail. Forrest needs a view system that is better than the current skins, and what you are doing is generally in line with what I have in mind. You like it, you have passion, and this is good. On the other hand, your descriptions of the system are sometimes totally incomprehensible. If I hadn't seen the code and did not have a similar concept in mind, I think I would have not understood. I think it's about time that I check out your work and give you feedback. Where do I start?
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 10:25 -0500, Antonio Gallardo wrote: > On Dom, 29 de Mayo de 2005, 8:22, Thorsten Scherler dijo: > > > > >> So in conclusion, I agree with Gregors concerns, but I also agree with > >> the direction Thorsten is trying to go in. > >> > > > > Actually that is the reason why I am proposing that forrest is *not* > > officially developing views anymore. I do not see that it get accepted > > better said it is causing confusion and concerns by user. I happily > > remove all code regarding views from forrest if the forrest pmc will > > positively vote for it. > > > > If this happens I will open an OS-project and develop it elsewhere. I > > will provide in such a project support for lenya and forrest but this > > would be independently from both projects. > > > > Forrest can keep on using skins with all the downside that they have > > (see the recent threads on user/dev). They are accepted. ;-) > > What are you talking about? Thorsten, please don't take it too personal! > > Sorry, it really seems I did. But no, I thought that this would maybe the best. > People can comment about the work you are doing. Yeah, you are right. > Unfortunately, I don't > had time to check you current work. > > 3 lessons I learned: > > 1-Don't get angry when people do bad comments about your work. AFAIK, only > people that do nothing, never makes mistakes!. ;-) > > I know how frustating is when you spended a lot of hours in a job and then > somebody told you this is not good. Please, next time, better breath a bit > and wait until you are OK, before answering. ;-) --> Pollo Alemán! > Muchas gracias, killo y tienes razón. I reckon it was really the frustration about not being able to describe what I am trying to do, more then the comment itself. > 2-I will suggest you to finish the job and then show us how easy or > dificult it is. Actually it is working like Diwaker stated in some of his mails but it needs some polishing to really be finished, there you are right. > > 3-Keep the user interface in mind all the time. > :) You are right and actually that is what I personally consider the easiest part of the views. > I remember you told me about this since last year. I still believe the > idea is good. Cheers, yeah the weeks living with you have been really valuable for the design and implementation of the views. Thanks again. > > So please don't call unnecesary votes before it is needed. ok? ;-) > Yeah, I understood. Thanks for the feedback. > Best Regards, > > Antonio Gallardo. > salu2 -- thorsten "Together we stand, divided we fall!" Hey you (Pink Floyd)
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 16:02 +0200, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > Thorsten Scherler wrote: > ... > > On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 11:39 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: > ... > >>So in conclusion, I agree with Gregors concerns, but I also agree with > >>the direction Thorsten is trying to go in. > > > > Actually that is the reason why I am proposing that forrest is *not* > > officially developing views anymore. > > Please reconsider. You are getting unnecessarily carried away by your > emotion. Don't mistakenly read mails as if they were personal complaints > when they are not. > Ok, I did not meant to do that but it seems I did. Sorry! I was *not* *recommending* it but was *offering* to do so because I thought that is maybe the best for forrest. > ... > > I do not see that it get accepted better said it is causing confusion > > and concerns by user. > > Let me be brutally honest with you, as you are being so too with this mail. > :) That is the best. ;-) > Forrest needs a view system that is better than the current skins, and > what you are doing is generally in line with what I have in mind. You > like it, you have passion, and this is good. > > On the other hand, your descriptions of the system are sometimes totally > incomprehensible. If I hadn't seen the code and did not have a similar > concept in mind, I think I would have not understood. > Maybe you can help to describe what views is trying to do. I know that you are working on a similar concept maybe you can write it down and I can use it to implement it. Like you notice it seems that I badly failed to describe it in an easy way. My biggest problem (I guess) is that I am not trying to solve a subset of problems but tackle more and more problems with the implementation. It would be awesome if you can help me again as you did with my first skin and set some simple basics goals (do's - don't's) to focus the work of views. > > I think it's about time that I check out your work and give you > feedback. Where do I start? > Actually you just did. ;-) It would help that you can firstly write down your thoughts of the view concept and maybe have a look in the processing of the xhtml. I do not like the way I produce the final xsl-stylesheets because I am using dynamic cocoon:// includes to produce an alias xsl. I reckon that is the most complex thing on the view that exist right now. I am sorry if my mail sounded as if I got carried away by my emotions and thanks for the headsup (at least you know me a wee bit and know that I sometime react quite emotional, I reckon that is my biggest weakness) salu2 -- thorsten "Together we stand, divided we fall!" Hey you (Pink Floyd)
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
> ¿? Are you talking about Diwaker Gupta? If so then what you wrote is not > true! I added CSS support to then decide to get rid of it again. Perfectly correct! I *was* working on another skin using views, but I've stopped work on that since I find that problem with the id generation for anchor tags is a much bigger problem. I'd just like to add that views IS the right direction for forrest IMHO and work SHOULD continue on it. I think views/viewsHelper is pretty easy to use, in reasonably good shape, and with some more polishing user documentation, it'll be ready to fly! So hang in there Thorsten! -- Diwaker Gupta http://resolute.ucsd.edu/diwaker
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
On Dom, 29 de Mayo de 2005, 8:22, Thorsten Scherler dijo: >> So in conclusion, I agree with Gregors concerns, but I also agree with >> the direction Thorsten is trying to go in. >> > > Actually that is the reason why I am proposing that forrest is *not* > officially developing views anymore. I do not see that it get accepted > better said it is causing confusion and concerns by user. I happily > remove all code regarding views from forrest if the forrest pmc will > positively vote for it. > > If this happens I will open an OS-project and develop it elsewhere. I > will provide in such a project support for lenya and forrest but this > would be independently from both projects. > > Forrest can keep on using skins with all the downside that they have > (see the recent threads on user/dev). They are accepted. ;-) What are you talking about? Thorsten, please don't take it too personal! People can comment about the work you are doing. Unfortunately, I don't had time to check you current work. 3 lessons I learned: 1-Don't get angry when people do bad comments about your work. AFAIK, only people that do nothing, never makes mistakes!. ;-) I know how frustating is when you spended a lot of hours in a job and then somebody told you this is not good. Please, next time, better breath a bit and wait until you are OK, before answering. ;-) --> Pollo Alemán! 2-I will suggest you to finish the job and then show us how easy or dificult it is. 3-Keep the user interface in mind all the time. I remember you told me about this since last year. I still believe the idea is good. So please don't call unnecesary votes before it is needed. ok? ;-) Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo.
Re: [Proposal] remove views from forrest (Re: Views as a Domain Specific Language)
Thorsten Scherler wrote: ... On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 11:39 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: ... So in conclusion, I agree with Gregors concerns, but I also agree with the direction Thorsten is trying to go in. Actually that is the reason why I am proposing that forrest is *not* officially developing views anymore. Please reconsider. You are getting unnecessarily carried away by your emotion. Don't mistakenly read mails as if they were personal complaints when they are not. ... I do not see that it get accepted better said it is causing confusion and concerns by user. Let me be brutally honest with you, as you are being so too with this mail. Forrest needs a view system that is better than the current skins, and what you are doing is generally in line with what I have in mind. You like it, you have passion, and this is good. On the other hand, your descriptions of the system are sometimes totally incomprehensible. If I hadn't seen the code and did not have a similar concept in mind, I think I would have not understood. I think it's about time that I check out your work and give you feedback. Where do I start? -- Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] - verba volant, scripta manent - (discussions get forgotten, just code remains) -
