what about a rails-based gforge like?

[Lionel Thiry]

Hello!

Motivated people have recently formed the VIT (visual identity team). I believe
they tend to work with rails. And I think rubyforge is on their roadmap. Are
these statements exact?

So, when ruby-lang is done, when ruby-doc is done and when time comes to tackle
rubyforge visual identity with rails help, how will they painlessly fullfill
that work without a previously well prepared rails-based replacement for GForge?

Then my question is, isn't there a need for a rails-based gforge like framework?

What do you all think about this?

Regards,
Lionel Thiry

 

[gabriele renzi]

Lionel Thiry ha scritto:

Then my question is, isn't there a need for a rails-based gforge like
framework?
What do you all think about this?

Regards,
Lionel Thiry

I am one of those that would like an "in ruby" version of almost
anything, but I think gforge and his cousins (savane, berlios and so on)
are quite complex projects, and I think rewriting them in ruby won't
grant you any advantage, and will take a lot of time.
And you have to consider that redesigning a web page may require just a
little php and css hacking, wich is not necessarily a huge work.

 

[Lionel Thiry]

Lionel Thiry ha scritto:




I am one of those that would like an "in ruby" version of almost
anything, but I think gforge and his cousins (savane, berlios and so on)
are quite complex projects, and I think rewriting them in ruby won't
grant you any advantage, and will take a lot of time.
And you have to consider that redesigning a web page may require just a
little php and css hacking, wich is not necessarily a huge work.

One of the main claim of rails folks is that "With rails, it is (up to) 10 times
faster to develop a web application". And I suppose it is still so when hacking
a rails app.

Then I believe that developing a GForge like rails application wouldn't be a so
huge work than the original framework was with PHP, and we would benefit of
higher flexibility and reliability.

This is what I believe. But I was asking for opinions. Does Gabriel Renzi's
opinion resume everybody else's opinion?

Regards,
Lionel Thiry

 

[James]

Hello!

Motivated people have recently formed the VIT (visual identity team). I believe
they tend to work with rails. And I think rubyforge is on their roadmap. Are
these statements exact?

So, when ruby-lang is done, when ruby-doc is done and when time comes to tackle
rubyforge visual identity with rails help, how will they painlessly fullfill
that work without a previously well prepared rails-based replacement for

GForge?

I'm on the vit-discuss mailing list, and this is the first I've heard of any
plans to do anything with rubyforge. But who knows? People get ambitious.
The ruby-doc redesign is unrelated to the VIT efforts. And while some number
of people working on the ruby-lang.org redesign may use Rails for one thing
or another, I'm am unaware of it playing any special role in the redesign
project. The mockups are posted to a blog running Hobbix. The discussion
happens on a mailing list written on Python.

About the only connection to Rails is that one of the mockups reminds me of
the Rails home page.

Then my question is, isn't there a need for a rails-based gforge like

framework?

There may be a need for a *Ruby* version of gforge. Maybe. Whether it gets
built using Rails, Nitro, Wee, or something else is another matter
altogether.


James

 

[Martin DeMello]

One of the main claim of rails folks is that "With rails, it is (up
to) 10 times faster to develop a web application". And I suppose it is
still so when hacking a rails app.

I don't think of GForge as primarily a webapp, even though the frontend
uses the web. There are a lot of complex details on the server side that
would have to be redone for very little gain.

martin