You have a cool name, btw.
On Oct 9, 7:42 am, Dice <tetrad...@gmail.com> wrote:
I will explain. Facets has gotten very big. At first I thought that
> Hello, my name is Dice. I'm a rubyist in Japan.
> I loved ini file support of Ruby Facets because ini file is very
> simple and useful format for configuration. But ini.rb was deprecated
> at Ruby Facets 2.7. Which does the decision depend on importance
> problem, license problem or other problems?
> If it is license problem, my ini library on Public Domain can be
> included, instead of deprecated ini.rb?
was good. But I realized that it was too big and that made it very
hard to maintain. So I decided to narrow it's focus to extension
methods and the most basic/universal additions only. That's why I
removed 40+ scripts. But just about all the stuff I deprecated I have
made sure is available in another way. It is better this way now b/c
it means Facets is more robust and also the libraries that have been
spun off are more robust too. I know that one of the nice things about
Facets was that you got a lot with a single dependency. That's good,
but only to an extent. It is better to have many dependencies if it
means each gem will be better for it.
In the case of ini.rb, Tim Pease has a library called inifile (http://
github.com/TwP/inifile). It is similar to ini.rb, and in fact I have
recently submitted some patches to add a few features it was missing
that ini.rb had. The only thing it lacks is the comment support. So
you may want to look into that. Perhaps your library has features that
you can contribute to inifile? ... yep, that's how having separate
gems allows things to gem better more easily :-)
Also, I have another INI library that I a have started playing with,
one that handles all variations including comments. Don't have time to
work on it right now though, but if you need better ini support then
inifile maybe we can collaborate.
facets-universal mailing list