From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivered-To: chneukirchen@gmail.com Received: by 10.204.72.79 with SMTP id l15cs783872bkj; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 11:54:24 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of grbounce-ceibQwUAAAB4YPBqaDIjI2bFOCxyyh3G=chneukirchen=gmail.com@googlegroups.com designates 10.90.63.10 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.90.63.10; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of grbounce-ceibQwUAAAB4YPBqaDIjI2bFOCxyyh3G=chneukirchen=gmail.com@googlegroups.com designates 10.90.63.10 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=grbounce-ceibQwUAAAB4YPBqaDIjI2bFOCxyyh3G=chneukirchen=gmail.com@googlegroups.com; dkim=pass header.i=grbounce-ceibQwUAAAB4YPBqaDIjI2bFOCxyyh3G=chneukirchen=gmail.com@googlegroups.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.90.63.10]) by 10.90.63.10 with SMTP id l10mr434771aga.15.1250189663615 (num_hops = 1); Thu, 13 Aug 2009 11:54:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:x-sender:x-apparently-to :received:received:received:received-spf:authentication-results :received:dkim-signature:domainkey-signature:received:received :message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type:mime-version:subject :date:references:x-mailer:reply-to:sender:precedence:x-google-loop :mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-unsubscribe :x-beenthere-env:x-beenthere; bh=c6EDKg+8MjNWoZoZwkrWO39fxWmx/jZGm6gQO9JLlkM=; b=zDXFKSIMKRvrTXK4djVgnPxxPk0MGbsKlnG1oOip5DieIj4Pzj6MPV/UREqdC/yBat aSe8a0XC3hmT1H38REfLk1FdAHTcNe4ZUWhZidH6H62EdQcWe3qnPjtW8iQoVdG+ktqC 8G3exOMFWESELny6UTumHv7i/r2ox9SykfFL4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-sender:x-apparently-to:received-spf:authentication-results :dkim-signature:domainkey-signature:message-id:from:to:in-reply-to :content-type:mime-version:subject:date:references:x-mailer:reply-to :sender:precedence:x-google-loop:mailing-list:list-id:list-post :list-help:list-unsubscribe:x-beenthere-env:x-beenthere; b=2ZDHfVBe1Ec1NSh3b4f4cqGHBYasfz3gIUU9Qu3PsyLQK39lTS5wQ3gDRulg5cuWqG w1ZlYxWyUl5RepH+kpqTrX3sN7xhoZgCsKUVJTHXfVmh0bqVdnqG/CG7RbEfbEcnT4V7 t8RaYIbkX4VULIWQFYK2pmB55hQjTVPT7cCyI= Received: by 10.90.63.10 with SMTP id l10mr63976aga.15.1250189663259; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 11:54:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.176.46.2 with SMTP id t2gr1586yqt.0; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 11:54:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: jftucker@gmail.com X-Apparently-To: rack-devel@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.210.12.12 with SMTP id 12mr362875ebl.0.1250189645613; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 11:54:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.210.12.12 with SMTP id 12mr362874ebl.0.1250189645544; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 11:54:05 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from ey-out-1920.google.com (ey-out-1920.google.com [74.125.78.146]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 15si131512ewy.0.2009.08.13.11.54.04; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 11:54:04 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jftucker@gmail.com designates 74.125.78.146 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.78.146; Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jftucker@gmail.com designates 74.125.78.146 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jftucker@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Received: by ey-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 5so270628eyb.22 for ; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 11:54:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:from:to :in-reply-to:content-type:mime-version:subject:date:references :x-mailer; bh=wrHAOJ/XVdgCbiPJqFA1PXeahVBhyZcju1b+W15i4lE=; b=L827H/nwFKGlPnu2RlltPNNd2f8N+mWbEyAe6JodpQpDKedtfjvasw2kII1FhMMxEe imJM0xjdSfnZj6f+eJ3VdGQhQijuPx3T8X87uG3AXdJaFLtwHlCF+MfhM/dDaEmwlHjK Q+d50/2ctVdDsGu7yiWl6GZPnDPm/KLXAcUKk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type:mime-version:subject :date:references:x-mailer; b=mgLqVHHONMMW6lTd2xItPG/RZJcY34GISE/YlsZGGIpJLp7RSj36kivU7rpxIlnBi+ WG0DJpTi20tzH5ER8YYi3V5+bhm4nGaKeqKdjw3n2SCOFjbV9tKInjcANabfD8gUBGkk NOJVG/T9uDo+yznYUN6jy0YvSldADn+xPYYDo= Received: by 10.216.2.78 with SMTP id 56mr246821wee.2.1250189644188; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 11:54:04 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from ?192.168.1.213? (bb-87-81-237-21.ukonline.co.uk [87.81.237.21]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j8sm384953gvb.6.2009.08.13.11.54.02 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 13 Aug 2009 11:54:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3433BF99-7B68-453F-9F2A-D2BEB4FB8EC4@gmail.com> From: James Tucker To: rack-devel@googlegroups.com In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-5--847981427 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Subject: Re: Bloat? Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 19:54:01 +0100 References: <2a8d4a710908131004i2cef7cb7lc0be17ae7fe7619f@mail.gmail.com> <1c5622660908131049x72c4460ao460d858bbfe96a7c@mail.gmail.com> <3FD8F8B4-D31A-40B4-BA74-7BE083A9BC41@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) Reply-To: rack-devel@googlegroups.com Sender: rack-devel@googlegroups.com Precedence: bulk X-Google-Loop: groups Mailing-List: list rack-devel@googlegroups.com; contact rack-devel+owner@googlegroups.com List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: , X-BeenThere-Env: rack-devel@googlegroups.com X-BeenThere: rack-devel@googlegroups.com --Apple-Mail-5--847981427 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 13 Aug 2009, at 18:55, Adrian Madrid wrote: > I don't think that rack is bloated considering the bloat is only > self-inflicted (autoload as mentioned) but Yahuda brings another > point: performance. I would love to have response more performant > for everyone to use. As long as it's profiled off of real style applications, and profile guided, sure, that would be lovely. > > > Adrian Madrid > My eBiz, Developer > 3082 W. Maple Loop Dr > Lehi, UT 84043 > 801-341-3824 > > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 11:50, James Tucker > wrote: > > > On 13 Aug 2009, at 18:49, Joshua Peek wrote: > > > Here are a few candidates I'd like to see moved into rack-contrib. > > Adapter::Camping > Auth::OpenID > ContentType > Recursive > Session::Memcache > > Whilst I sort of agree, doesn't this just shift the bloat problem > somewhere else? > > > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Matt Todd wrote: > I was talking to a friend of mine yesterday and he mentioned that > thought > the Rack package itself seemed to be slightly bloated by things like > Basic > Auth et al. He mentioned two things I thought were interesting and I > wanted > to get your feedback on it: > 1. Like Merb, Rack probably could benefit from using a core and more > separation of functionality, and > 2. Rack core should only include what's necessary for Rack::Lint to > validate > a basic application at minimum. > Thoughts? > Matt > -- > Matt Todd > Highgroove Studios > www.highgroove.com > cell: 404-314-2612 > blog: maraby.org > > Scout - Web Monitoring and Reporting Software > www.scoutapp.com > > > > > -- > Joshua Peek > > --Apple-Mail-5--847981427 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 13 Aug 2009, = at 18:55, Adrian Madrid wrote:

I don't = think that rack is bloated considering the bloat is only self-inflicted = (autoload as mentioned) but Yahuda brings another point: performance. I = would love to have response more performant for everyone to = use. 

As long as it's profiled off of = real style applications, and profile guided, sure, that would be = lovely.

=

Adrian Madrid
My eBiz, = Developer
3082 W. Maple Loop Dr
Lehi, UT 84043
801-341-3824
=

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 11:50, James = Tucker <jftucker@gmail.com> = wrote:

=
On 13 Aug 2009, at 18:49, Joshua Peek wrote:


Here are a few candidates I'd like to see = moved into rack-contrib.

Adapter::Camping
Auth::OpenID
= ContentType
Recursive
Session::Memcache
=
Whilst I sort of agree, doesn't this just shift the bloat = problem somewhere else?


=

On Thu, Aug 13, = 2009 at 12:04 PM, Matt Todd<chiology@gmail.com> wrote:
I was talking to a friend of mine yesterday and = he mentioned that thought
the Rack package itself seemed to be = slightly bloated by things like Basic
Auth et al. He mentioned two = things I thought were interesting and I wanted
to get your feedback = on it:
1. Like Merb, Rack probably could benefit from using a core = and more
separation of functionality, and
2. Rack core should = only include what's necessary for Rack::Lint to validate
a basic = application at minimum.
Thoughts?
Matt
--
Matt Todd
= Highgroove Studios
www.highgroove.com
cell: 404-314-2612
= blog: maraby.org
=
Scout - Web Monitoring and Reporting Software
www.scoutapp.com



=
--
Joshua Peek

=


= --Apple-Mail-5--847981427--