I would expect that someone might have the experience to do this
across all web frameworks, having used them enough, while not being a
primary contributer to one of them (conflict of interest).

However, there are probably few people who fall into this category.
Most of them started writing there own web frameworks :).

Nick

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 03:16:20 +0900, Edgardo Hames <ehames / gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 00:07:20 +0900, Alan Garrison <alang / cronosys.com> wrote:
> > Francis Hwang wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > All true. So instead of asking people to code less, we should probably
> > > ask them to document more.
> > >
> > I think for some projects it's not a matter of documentation quantity
> > but just a lack of a stated purpose.  Someone can post "I wrote Package
> > X and here's the API", but what this doesn't answer is "why".  If
> > someone wrote something to scratch an intellectual itch, that's
> > perfectly fine, but if you have a goal in mind for a particular project,
> > state it up front.  As far as frameworks goes, perhaps there just needs
> > to be clarification on:
> > 1) I wrote X because...
> > 2) (If applicable) X is modelled after application/framework Y
> > 3) Right now X can do...
> > 3) I want X to eventually be able to do x, y, z...
> >
> > Particularly #4, if this is stated up front, you'll likely get other
> > people contributing code faster just because the roadmap is plainly laid
> > out.  If code is created only for the itch-of-the-moment, a package
> > won't get very far.
> >
> 
> How about putting up a page in the Ruby wiki stating tha capabilities
> and roadmap of each framework? This could also be done for all
> different categories of applications and would be a very valuable
> contribution for new developers who just don't know which one to use
> or contribute to.
> 
> Kind Regards,
> Ed
> --
>  Alcohol is the anesthesia by which we endure the operation of life.
> -- George Bernard Shaw
> 
> 


-- 
Nicholas Van Weerdenburg