On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 7:02 AM, villas <villa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Oct 21, 10:45 pm, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote: > > We can go on and on. We need other people input on this. > > I cannot understand why Massimo's plugin idea appears so contentious. >
The contention is on its congruence with its intent; this should not be hard to understand. It intends to provide a "modular" system, but yet forces view of the code into the appication space - this is asking for trouble (and has unnecessary other limitations to boot). > Perhaps the only problem is that the smaller details of his > implementation are in his head rather than written down. Not at all - in fact, I suspect quite the contrary (and have tested / challenged that here): I believe the BIG details (never mind the small ones) are not well worked out - in head or otherwise, and that is precisely what I am saying this (in particular) needs BEFORE the "agile" build often / release often... you can't build much if you are either building the wrong thing, or are unclear about important parts of what you are building. Agile is just a method for the very last steps of development (that is, the implementation); scrums and stories are for relatively simple requirements; this needs some responsibility-driven partitioning before you even start considering stuff down at the level that agile works. However, in > the best traditions of agile programming, he has released his concept > as software which can be tried and tested. What is the point of > pretending that we are working as a huge team of programmers who feel > compelled to specify their entire day before they can eat breakfast? > > IMO there is little harm in adding a model, controller and views to an > app, providing they are named as per the convention and thus can > easily be removed again. > I disagree - I disagree very strongly, for many reasons (separation of concerns; multiple responsibilities for data - a bane in programming recognized since the profusion of globals in Fortran drove people to write RATFOR (rational fortran, a structure reminiscent of C, when C was not yet widely available). THere are many fundamental and longstanding CS basics at risk here, and those basics have good reasons. That is being missed here, and needs to be "seen" and appropriately dealt with. Agile of bad / imprecise requirements only results in quickly produced bad results. I can understand if you don't see this, but that does not mean all these reasons are not here. So, I'll repeat: this needs work if it is to be workable and usable. Of this I have no doubts. - Yarko > > If people are confusing the presence of a few extra files in their > directories as spaghetti code, they are surely mistaken. There is no > reason to have all the files in one directory if there is an install > and uninstall procedure. For example, if all models, including those > of the plugin, can be found in one place, then surely that's > beneficial. > > I vote that we should embrace Massimo's idea and encourage him. > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py-users" group. To post to this group, send email to web2py@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
