Ruby Forum Rails Spinoffs (closed, excessive spam) > Sam may check in soon

Hi,

Marcel (aka noradio) works with Sam. I asked Marcel on #rubyonrails if
he could give Sam a friendly nudge to check in with the community
through this list. Marcel said "will do".

Peter

I have to admit I'm a little worried about the question whether I should
consider script.aculo.us to be 'maintained' or not.

A long time ago there was movement to release 1.6.2, and there's a few 
good
bugfixes in the trac bug database, but not a whole lot of movement seems 
to
be happening anymore, and the 1.6.2 release never appeared.

script.aculo.us has some seriously wonderful scripts, and prototype is 
the
base I prefer to use for my web application client side scripting, 
however I
feel it would be a not-so-good-thing-to-do(Tm) to invest and build upon 
a
toolkit that's no longer actively maintained, and active development on
which has stopped.

So I'm hoping, a lot, that my worries will be in vain, and this amazing
toolkit and its community will continue to grow. If not I'll soon be 
asking
for advice what to switch over too :-)

	-- Chris

On 7/22/06, Chris Chabot <chabotc@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> prototype is the
> base I prefer to use for my web application client side scripting,

Why?

Seriously Perter, just keep it to one thread at least. You already know 
the
answer. Same answer as pretty much everyone else on this list.

script.aculo.us sure is actively maintained.

I consider most stuff in it working pretty nicely (although there
are a few patches waiting, I know, I know), so I don't feel there's much
pressure to do rush out a new release. Plus, I'm pretty stuffed with
a huge project here.

Anyway, I should have some free time to give script.aculo.us some love
in the first half of August.

HTH,
Thomas



Am 22.07.2006 um 10:37 schrieb Chris Chabot:

> script.aculo.us has some seriously wonderful scripts, and prototype  
> amazing
> Michaux
> Peter
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-spinoffs mailing list
> Rails-spinoffs@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-spinoffs
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-spinoffs mailing list
> Rails-spinoffs@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-spinoffs

--
Thomas Fuchs
wollzelle

http://www.wollzelle.com

questentier on AIM
madrobby on irc.freenode.net

http://www.fluxiom.com :: online digital asset management
http://script.aculo.us :: Web 2.0 JavaScript
http://mir.aculo.us :: Where no web developer has gone before

On 7/22/06, Brandon Aaron <brandon.aaron@gmail.com> wrote:
> Seriously Perter, just keep it to one thread at least.

Fair enough. It was a genuine question. I'm not a troll or a jerk. I
haven't tried to insult anyone.

> You already know the answer.  Same answer as pretty much everyone else on this list.

But I still don't "get it". That's my problem. I would never trade
robust code because I wish that it was Ruby embeded in browsers
instead of JavaScript.

I wonder if other Rails users haven't really looked carefully at
Prototype.js' code and are using it simply because it is default in
Rails. I was like this for a long time too. Rails programmers are not
necessarily knowledgeable about JavaScript too so they may not know.
They trust the reputation of Rails' Ruby programmers in choosing a
JavaScript library.

No I'm not a JavaScript expert but, with all due respect, it doesn't
seem like there are any JavaScript gurus here anyway.

I guess I feel like talking about Prototype.js.

-Perter

> No I'm not a JavaScript expert but, with all due respect, it doesn't
> seem like there are any JavaScript gurus here anyway.

I'm sorry? You are addressing probably one of the largest gathering of
JavaScript gurus on the planet.

If you don't like prototype.js or script.aculo.us, don't use it. Post
on a blog or something, trolling here is not welcome.

Thanks.

Cheers,
Jon