MODX Staff
Since Mootools and jQuery are currently co-existing, and the MODx team is making the updates and including both ... well I think you know what our policy is.
I know jQuery is very popular at the moment and there are some good working jQuery plugins out there. But this is an existing application using MooTools. It looks very unconsidered to me to include a plugin into the main distribution that comes with an other framework, especially since this could be done in MooTools as well.
So what is the MODx policy?
ManagerManager is 100% worth the inclusion of an additional library. If you’d like to update the Manager to the latest Mootools release and port ManagerManager to Mootools we’d certainly be glad to consider other alternatives. That said, I think it’d be significantly easier to get rid of the remaining few spots where an outdated version of Mootools still exists in favor of jQuery.
The MODx manager includes now both MooTools 1.11 and jQuery (from MM).
Since Mootools and jQuery are currently co-existing, and the MODx team is making the updates and including both ... well I think you know what our policy is.
Tongue ManagerManager is 100% worth the inclusion of an additional library. If you’d like to update the Manager to the latest Mootools release and port ManagerManager to Mootools we’d certainly be glad to consider other alternatives. That said, I think it’d be significantly easier to get rid of the remaining few spots where an outdated version of MooTools still exists in favor of jQuery.
. I’m not so sure how the development of MODx is working right now. Is the philosophy code first and then all the coolest stuff will be included or are there discussions and decisions made first?
Quote from: eerne at Oct 19, 2009, 11:13 AM
The MODx manager includes now both MooTools 1.11 and jQuery (from MM).
MM doesn’t include it; it was included with QuickManager from 1.0, and MM is just piggybacking it! I was careful to ensure that MM is quite flexible about where it gets jQuery from, and has configuration options to get it from the version distributed with ModX, from another local source, or from Google API hosting.
I only want to ask what’s going on. What is the policy. Is it 2010 and normal to include various frameworks, since it works?
MODX Staff
Currently our policy is to distribute the legacy code (Mootools) and the new code (jQuery). Our preference would be to only have one library, but since this is currently driven by donations of time, we have both and since there’s currently no major conflicts with the core distribution, we consider it OK, though certainly not ideal. Yes it’s a bit "icky" but I’ll take functionality over philosophy today (knowing that the intention is to change it down the road, sooner than later).
Since Mootools and jQuery are currently co-existing, and the MODx team is making the updates and including both ... well I think you know what our policy is.
I’m sorry, but I really don’t know what the policy is. Either you just include every plugin that is cool and works or you decided to switch slowly to jquery (which I is fine for me). It’s just I’m no mind-reader, if this discussion has happend please point me to the thread.
If I write or port a really awesome widget that uses Dojo will you include Dojo too?Nope!
ManagerManager is 100% worth the inclusion of an additional library. If you’d like to update the Manager to the latest Mootools release and port ManagerManager to Mootools we’d certainly be glad to consider other alternatives. That said, I think it’d be significantly easier to get rid of the remaining few spots where an outdated version of MooTools still exists in favor of jQuery.
. I’m not so sure how the development of MODx is working right now. Is the philosophy code first and then all the coolest stuff will be included or are there discussions and decisions made first?
There’s some very cool things that can be done with Mootools for devs that prefer it as well, to be sure (e.g., the front-end xEdit project which is insanely cool is being done in Mootools). I don’t know if Mike will have time to focus on that task anytime soon, so any assistance there would be appreciated. Please feel free to PM me and we can discuss other options or we certainly can open a discussion in another thread.
I believe majority of the front-end web developers will use jQuery for basic web site effects anyway.
Ok that makes sense.
Currently our policy is to distribute the legacy code (Mootools) and the new code (jQuery). Our preference would be to only have one library, but since this is currently driven by donations of time, we have both and since there’s currently no major conflicts with the core distribution, we consider it OK, though certainly not ideal. Yes it’s a bit "icky" but I’ll take functionality over philosophy today (knowing that the intention is to change it down the road, sooner than later).