Re: Mason 2.0 thoughts

Some comments, feel free to integrate into the page if you agree (I  
find wiki difficult for collaboration of this kind):

* I agree that it is more worthwhile to focus on the templing  
portions of Mason for the future, and to encourage people to consider  
more modern mvc frameworks for the controller aspects. That said,  
many sites will be using Mason in the traditional way for a long time  
and this needs to be fully supported.

* I'd reduce "Things to Break" to an absolute minimum. Users hate  
gratuitous backwards incompatibilities, and we got justifiably  
slapped for this when we broke things unnecessarily for version 1.1.  
If you're going to break things, you have to at least compensate  
users for their porting efforts with groundbreaking new features or  
architecture. We did that for 1.1, but I don't see this happening  
again in Mason's future.

For example, <%filter> is ugly and I wish it had been designed  
differently, but is used in enough sites that we can never get rid of  
it. object_file_extension was probably unnecessary, but what's the  
big win in eliminating it and annoying the four users that are using  
it? :)

* A more considerate way to do the split, IMO, is to keep the  
framework in HTML::Mason and move the templating portion out to  
Template::Mason. Even then, we might use some package name trickery  
to avoid breaking current users who are depending on the  
HTML::Mason::* namespace, e.g. HTML::Mason::Commands.

* The one advantage of $m->cache is that it automatically separates  
caches into private namespaces based on component, whereas AFAICT,  
Catalyst has everything writing into a global cache. It would be  
unfortunate to lose this feature.

Jon

On Apr 29, 2007, at 6:22 PM, Dave Rolsky wrote:

> Jon Swartz and I recently chatted and one of things we talked about is
> what a Mason 2.0 might look like. It's been buzzing around my brain
> recently, so I write up some notes on this here -
> http://www.masonhq.com/?Mason20Notes
>
> Please note that this is still just at the "maybe this might be a good
> idea" stage, which means there is no commitment to do it at all,  
> much less
> a timeline.
>
> Nonetheless, if people are interested in discussing this, now's a good
> time.
>
>
> -dave
>
> /*===================================================
> VegGuide.Org                        www.BookIRead.com
> Your guide to all that's veg.       My book blog
> ===================================================*/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ---
> This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
> Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
> control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
> http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
> _______________________________________________
> Mason-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mason-devel
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/