royale-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Container change
Date Thu, 10 May 2018 11:44:30 GMT
2.- Is not right.

The classes copied, will have another implementation for Jewel purposes,
and others are concrete implementations that every UI set should have since
the base clase is in Core (and eventually could as well follow is own
implementation path).


2018-05-10 13:39 GMT+02:00 Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>:

>  Harbs,
>
> Here is how I understand that :
> 1. It supposed to be easier maintain if Jewel will be without basic.
> 2. Less code in particular classes copied from Basic.
> 3. It seems to be less size when Basic is outside.
>
> The understand what actually Basic is coming from the point when you really
> write some real world application. Then you realize that is not only UI
> library.
>
> Does that enough to make such a bit changes ? Is it really necessary. Is it
> a technical reasons ?
>
> Piotr
>
>
> 2018-05-10 12:48 GMT+02:00 Harbs <harbs.lists@gmail.com>:
>
> > The only reasons I seem to have seen are:
> > 1. A philosophical opposition to having Basic as a dependency.
> > 2. Not wanting Basic CSS included in a Jewel project.
> >
> > Unless I’m missing something, #1 I simply disagree with.
> > #2 sounds like a valid argument, but it seems to me more like something
> > which needs to be fixed in the compiler. CSS not used by an app should
> not
> > be included and I think we need a way of avoiding typename conflicts
> > between component sets.
> >
> > Are there other arguments which I missed?
> >
> > Since Carlos does not seem to want to explain himself again, I’m asking
> > others on the list:
> >
> > Do others understand why Carlos feels the refactor is important?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Harbs
> >
> > > On May 10, 2018, at 1:32 PM, Carlos Rovira <carlosrovira@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Can we please keep this discussion about the technical reasons for a
> > >> refactor and whether or not it’s the right thing to do? If you have
> > strong
> > >> technical reasons why Basic should not be a dependency please explain
> > them.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Harbs, I'll explained lots of time, and you keep ask the same. What did
> > you
> > > not understand of the things I expressed so many time?
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
> Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
> <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
>



-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message