[Catalyst] Catalyst::Controller::Rose::Simple

[Peter Karman]

Alexandre Jousset wrote on 9/20/07 11:41 AM:
>     Hello Matt,
> 
> Matt S Trout wrote:
>>>     Feel free to ask me any question you want.
>>
>> Why haven't you submitted patches to the existing C-C-Rose?
>>
>> Any module called '-Simple' usually means "there was an existing module
>> that worked but I'm too lazy to patch it" - please justify why that isn't
>> the case here :)
> 
>     Well, I wasn't meaning that kind of question but hey, I said "any 
> question you want" ;-)...
> 
>     Seriously, this is of course a good question, so here is my answer.
> 
>     I'm sure I haven't your experience but for me (and also for Peter 
> Karman, C::C::Rose author), the suffix "::Simple" (suggested by him) 
> means "Take all that [what already exists, i.e. Catalyst and Rose] and 
> make it simpler to use together".

Alexandre,

Actually, I had suggested you use ::Simple because in your original email to me, 
(a) you had indicated you intended to use C::C::Rose, but with an API similar to 
the FormBuilder philosophy, and (b) you had a working title of 
C::C::Rose::FormManager, which I thought would be misleading, since all the 
existing C::C::Rose::* classes also manage forms.

As you indicate below, you don't use any of the C::C::Rose code, design or 
philosophy, so sharing the namespace seems misleading at the very least.
So I'd prefer it if you used a difference namespace altogether. I believe the 
latest best practice recommendation is to use the CatalystX top-level space. 
Perhaps something like CatalystX::RHTMLOManager or similar.


> 
>     In fact I don't even use its modules in mine since the goals are not 
> the same and the functionalities don't overlap. The key point is that 
> you can see it as the C::C::FormBuilder module reimplemented for Rose 
> (and that was really the case).
> 
>     At first, on Peter's advice, I looked at C::C::Rose::* but I did not 
> found anything relevant for what I was trying to do.
> 

I'd like to encourage you in your efforts at making the Rose projects easier to 
use with Catalyst. Since you've got a different approach to what "easy" means 
than I do, starting with a namespace that clearly delineates your project from 
mine seems to be in your best interest.

pek

-- 
Peter Karman  .  http://peknet.com/  .  peter at peknet.com