On Jan 16, 9:53 am, Aman Gupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Shortly after the sequel-model split from core, the core was split off
> into its own sequel-core gem. I'm wondering why?
>
> The sequel gem is currently just two lines of code (require 'sequel-
> core'; require 'sequel-model')- it makes more sense to me to keep
> sequel's core in the sequel gem and maintain the model separately as
> the sequel_model gem.

Originally I meant it to be the way you suggested, but then I thought
that people that would like to work with models would have to install
'sequel_model' which is less intuitive than just installing 'sequel',
so I came up with the bundle idea, so by default people installing and
requiring 'sequel' would get the model functionality as well as the
core.

I think that's more intuitive than requiring 'sequel_model'. People
who are only interested in the core functionality (and who are almost
always more advanced programmers) can deal with requiring sequel_core.
Does this make sense?

sharon
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sequel-talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sequel-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to