Merb support

[Erno Mononen]

(I'm crossposting to users@... and dev@...,
please reply to dev@ruby only)

Hi folks,

Matt Aimonetti from the Merb core team expressed interest in helping to
integrate Merb in NetBeans, so hopefully by working together we can
provide support already in the next release. I'm copying here part of
Matt's email about the things that the support should cover:

"Running the specs from within the IDE (the most requested feature atm)
- run the dev application in a bundled state if needed. (ALL required
gems are packaged in a local gems folder and you start merb by using the
binaries in the local bin folder) TM doesn't support that and it's a key
feature.

- browse documentation/code hinting specific to Merb. (we'd have to help
you there)
- access/reproduce some of the thor/rake methods like bundling/generate
resources..

- access to merb console (merb -i)
- support for different app layouts (I don't think NB should overwrite
whatever the user generated like it's the case with a Rails app at the
moment)
- debugger support including from within the spec runner"

Does anyone have any particular things to add to that? I think the
terminal emulator, which we should have in 7.0, already covers at least
the merb console use case (we plan to migrate also the Rails and IRB
consoles to use the terminal emulator when it's ready). Likewise, the
new Rake runner in 6.5 should help in running /debugging specs, though
it could probably use some enhancements to make it even more convenient.

One thing to consider is whether Merb should have its own project type
in the IDE, or whether it should be something that can be added to a
Ruby or RoR project (I hear some people are using Merb in Rails
applications). Ideally I guess having both options would be ideal, so
the question is rather what should come first. Any thoughts on that?

Any feedback is welcomed,

Erno








---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Arun Gupta]

I'd like the ability to directly run/debug a Merb application on
GlassFish gem and v3 trunk. Running is explained at:

http://blogs.sun.com/arungupta/entry/getting_started_with_merb_using

Debugging behavior to be identical to Rails debugging.

-Arun

Erno Mononen wrote:

> (I'm crossposting to users@... and dev@...,
> please reply to dev@ruby only)
>
> Hi folks,
>
> Matt Aimonetti from the Merb core team expressed interest in helping to
> integrate Merb in NetBeans, so hopefully by working together we can
> provide support already in the next release. I'm copying here part of
> Matt's email about the things that the support should cover:
>
> "Running the specs from within the IDE (the most requested feature atm)
> - run the dev application in a bundled state if needed. (ALL required
> gems are packaged in a local gems folder and you start merb by using the
> binaries in the local bin folder) TM doesn't support that and it's a key
> feature.
>
> - browse documentation/code hinting specific to Merb. (we'd have to help
> you there)
> - access/reproduce some of the thor/rake methods like bundling/generate
> resources..
>
> - access to merb console (merb -i)
> - support for different app layouts (I don't think NB should overwrite
> whatever the user generated like it's the case with a Rails app at the
> moment)
> - debugger support including from within the spec runner"
>
> Does anyone have any particular things to add to that? I think the
> terminal emulator, which we should have in 7.0, already covers at least
> the merb console use case (we plan to migrate also the Rails and IRB
> consoles to use the terminal emulator when it's ready). Likewise, the
> new Rake runner in 6.5 should help in running /debugging specs, though
> it could probably use some enhancements to make it even more convenient.
>
> One thing to consider is whether Merb should have its own project type
> in the IDE, or whether it should be something that can be added to a
> Ruby or RoR project (I hear some people are using Merb in Rails
> applications). Ideally I guess having both options would be ideal, so
> the question is rather what should come first. Any thoughts on that?
>
> Any feedback is welcomed,
>
> Erno
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>

--
Application Platform, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/arungupta

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Erno Mononen]

Thanks everyone for the feedback. From what I can gather, we should
start with the following:

- project type for Merb
- running/debugging specs
- running/debugging bundled apps

Once we have these in place we can dive into other aspects. It's
probably best if I set up the basic infrastructure in the netbeans
repository. I think I'll start working on the project type for Merb,
likely will have a bunch of questions as I go. When the basic stuff is
set up, it should be easier for others to join.

How does that sound? I'm hoping that I will have time to work on this
next week.

Erno


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Peter Williams-4]

Out of curiosity, have you considered the possibility of a single ruby
project type and treating Rails, Merb, etc as frameworks (similar in
concept, but probably not architecturally) to what web does?

-Peter

Erno Mononen wrote:

> Thanks everyone for the feedback. From what I can gather, we should
> start with the following:
>
> - project type for Merb
> - running/debugging specs
> - running/debugging bundled apps
>
> Once we have these in place we can dive into other aspects. It's
> probably best if I set up the basic infrastructure in the netbeans
> repository. I think I'll start working on the project type for Merb,
> likely will have a bunch of questions as I go. When the basic stuff is
> set up, it should be easier for others to join.
>
> How does that sound? I'm hoping that I will have time to work on this
> next week.
>
> Erno
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[phatmann]

Peter, what would be the advantage of this approach?

On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 8:46 PM, Peter Williams <Pete.Williams@...> wrote:

Out of curiosity, have you considered the possibility of a single ruby project type and treating Rails, Merb, etc as frameworks (similar in concept, but probably not architecturally) to what web does?

-Peter

[Matt Aimonetti-2]

Sorry, I thought I replied to this thread, but apparently I did not.
Erno, I believe you summed up the principal features needed.

Let us know if you have any questions and if there is anything else we can help you with.

-Matt

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 8:21 AM, Erno Mononen <Erno.Mononen@...> wrote:

Thanks everyone for the feedback. From what I can gather, we should start with the following:

- project type for Merb
- running/debugging specs
- running/debugging bundled apps

Once we have these in place we can dive into other aspects. It's probably best if I set up the basic infrastructure in the netbeans repository. I think I'll start working on the project type for Merb, likely will have a bunch of questions as I go. When the basic stuff is set up, it should be easier for others to join.

How does that sound? I'm hoping that I will have time to work on this next week.

Erno


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Peter Williams-4]

It could make it simpler (ie easier and cheaper) to add support for
alternative ruby/web frameworks to NetBeans.

Of course, it might also be a nightmare and offer a horrible user
experience, but that's what the "thinking about" part was about.

-Peter

Tony Mann wrote:

> Peter, what would be the advantage of this approach?
>
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 8:46 PM, Peter Williams <Pete.Williams@...
> <mailto:Pete.Williams@...>> wrote:
>
>     Out of curiosity, have you considered the possibility of a single
>     ruby project type and treating Rails, Merb, etc as frameworks
>     (similar in concept, but probably not architecturally) to what web
>     does?
>
>     -Peter
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...