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. 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 >> > >