[dojo-contributors] what is the raison detre for dojo 2.0.

Ken Benjamin kenbenjamin at kenbenjamin.net
Thu Oct 11 15:18:02 EDT 2012


+1



Sasha, I’m sorry but the difference between “simple” and “enterprise” apps
is a continuum, not a black and white distinction.



I’ve built apps over the years for single individuals running their own
business of one, huge government organizations, and lots of groups between
the two. Which were the “enterprise” apps? It wasn’t always the big guys.
Sometimes the small guys had a bigger scope and the big guys just need
something simple, say a “brochure site.”



The basic point is that Dojo should be easy enough to use for simple sites
and advanced enough for complex sites.



If a trade off needs to be made, then I would opt for power over simplicity
but I would try to preserve simplicity where possible.



We don’t need, and should not try, to be jQuery but we can be accessible to
small projects, new developers, and folks who don’t have 10 years of
professional app dev experience in a team setting. Right now, that’s not
always the case.



We are doing a disservice to folks by not giving them an option to start
easy with a robust toolkit they can grow into. We don’t have to dumb-down
the toolkit, just show some simple best-practices / how-to stuff to show
people the Dojo and AMD way of things. Once you know how it works, it’s
pretty cool. Getting there is just too hard right now (but getting better).



If you think hard=enterprise-grade then you’re missing the trick.
Enterprises like easy because people are the ones making the decisions.
It’s easy to pick the #1 software in the marketplace, regardless of how
dumb that choice is. Dojo needs to be viable enough for those people in
those enterprises to make the choice that Dojo is worth the commitment and
that they can hire programmers to work on it. Easy makes both things
possible by enhancing popularity and making the training of new staff much
easier.



Ken B







*From:* dojo-contributors-bounces at mail.dojotoolkit.org [mailto:
dojo-contributors-bounces at mail.dojotoolkit.org] *On Behalf Of *Tom Trenka
*Sent:* Thursday, October 11, 2012 8:39 PM
*To:* dojo dev.
*Subject:* Re: [dojo-contributors] what is the raison detre for dojo 2.0.



Not for nothing, but you're so wrong I have a hard time even considering
where to start.  But...I'll give it a shot.

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Sasha Firsov <suns at firsov.net> wrote:

TT,
I missed the part of 2.0 === Nano/Core in this long thread.
Still we are talking about patterns which this foundation support and based
on.

The development patterns used for "simple" developer and "enterprise" not
just different but mutually exclusive. That is what I tried to say.



Indeed, you are entirely wrong about this.  There is nothing mutually
exclusive about it.  While I don't like your dichotomy between "simple" and
"enterprise" developers (since in my experience most enterprise developers
are actually one step above what you term as simple), I'll put it this way:
*both* sets of developers are looking for one thing.  A simple way to
accomplish what they need to do in the quickest, simplest, easiest ways
possible.



The calls chaining, modularization, etc where given as samples of dev-t
patterns conflict.



No one ever said anything about turning Dojo 2.0 into a full-on chaining
library, and no one EVER said that we'd be dropping (in particular) our AMD
approach in favor of killing off modularization.  You're just plain wrong
on this, and I simply have no idea where you even got the idea we'd
consider doing something like that.



There are times when chaining is a good thing (like dojox/charting), and
there are times when it is not (as in, making EVERYTHING chainable).
 Still...I really don't understand where you're coming from on most of your
expressed opinions, but given my experience I am going to suspect that
almost all of your work has been in the enterprise environment.



If I can make that assumption, then I think you are probably concerned that
we would do something stupid like weaken our principal marketing strength;
I can assure you that we will never do anything of the kind.



Unless you are able to resolve the difference in requirements for "simple"
and "enterprise" there is no point to talk to support both.
We need to list those requirements and see what is doable what is not. IMO
there is no room for "simple" one.



Again you are missing the forest for the trees.  Dojo Core AS IT STANDS NOW
is an excellent substitute for something like jQuery.  That will not change
(and indeed it can't, for the simple reason that it's not possible to build
something well like Dijit on top of it).  What I am saying is Dojo 2.0
needs to be more-so.



I'd also guess that you've never had the pleasure of writing a strong,
open-source base library.  If that's the case, trust me when I say to you
that decisions at this level are INCREDIBLY important and none should ever
be taken lightly.  There is a ton of code written on top of Core and to not
consider that when approaching a refresh would be ridiculously
short-sighted.



-- Tom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20121011/1ae7d65c/attachment-0001.htm 


More information about the dojo-contributors mailing list