http://github.com/rails/rails/commit/63d8f56774dcb1ea601928c3eb6c119d359fae10 Tekin Suleyman Freelance Ruby on Rails Developer +44 (0) 7968 355 460 http://tekin.co.uk
on 26.11.2008 16:15
on 26.11.2008 16:26
David spoke to me yesterday about this. We're going to be folding a lot (but possibly/probably not all) of the functionality into Rails :)
on 26.11.2008 16:29
AWESOME news! Any idea what won't make the cut? Asset management stuff, perhaps? -Rob
on 26.11.2008 16:35
After everything that's come before, that is great news! I guess they were looking for a 'big new feature' for the next release! ;0 On 26 Nov 2008, at 15:24, James Adam wrote: David spoke to me yesterday about this. We're going to be folding a lot (but possibly/probably not all) of the functionality into Rails :)
on 26.11.2008 17:14
Asset management will be in, probably migrations too, although in a simplified form. The only thing we haven't discussed so far is the code mixing. James
on 26.11.2008 17:23
The code mixing is incredibly useful for allowing Engines to be used/shared effectively in a DRY way. But if it's not in Rails distro, it can always still be in a very small separate Engines package. This is good stuff, thanks Rails core. Jonathan James Adam wrote: >> >>>> >>>> >>> http://lists.rails-engines.org/listinfo.cgi/engine-developers-rails-engines.org > > _______________________________________________ > Engine-Developers mailing list > Engine-Developers@lists.rails-engines.org > http://lists.rails-engines.org/listinfo.cgi/engine-developers-rails-engines.org > -- Jonathan Rochkind Digital Services Software Engineer The Sheridan Libraries Johns Hopkins University 410.516.8886 rochkind (at) jhu.edu
on 26.11.2008 17:40
I'm happy to see this but I am curious. Why did the rails team change their minds?
on 26.11.2008 17:49
I believe David has discovered that he has a personal usecase for them, essentially. As with most things that make it into Rails, one of the contributors needs to personally need it for it to really be considered :) James
on 26.11.2008 17:54
> As with most things that make it into Rails, one of the contributors > needs to personally need it for it to really be considered :) > Ain't that the truth!
on 26.11.2008 18:51
I don't know what made him change his mind today, but after his
keynote at railsconf eu I've mentioned to him that people today are
using Engines for something pretty similar to what he suggested in his
talk ("concern'izing" stuff to modules), just one level up in the
architecture (i.e. using plugins). He was amazed and said he liked
that idea.
I'm just happy that finally I can stop dealing with fud in
#rubyonrails and elsewhere about "david says engines are deprecated".
Oh, btw ... James, thank you for Engines ;)
on 28.11.2008 20:51
Think we will get model mixins out of this?
on 28.11.2008 22:02
Fuck yes! I'm sending a big FU to everyone who said putting Substruct on Engines 2+ years ago was a bad move. Glad to see people are finally waking up and realizing Engines kick ass. -------------------- seth - subimage llc ----- http://sublog.subimage.com ----- Cashboard - Estimates, invoices, and time tracking software - for free! http://www.getcashboard.com ----- Substruct - Open source RoR e-commerce software. http://code.google.com/p/substruct/