Mixed suggestions

[sandstrom]

Is there an existing issue for this?

• I have searched the existing issues

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe

Thanks for an awesome gem!

I've played around a bit with it recently, and it's very useful! 🎉

First some suggestions for the repo:

• Remove the roadmap wiki entry, no longer relevant.
• I'd disable the 'wiki' and 'project' tabs, since they aren't used.
• I'd open the 'discussions' tab, great for things that aren't really issues (to keep the noise in issues down).

Some feature suggestions:

These are just sentence-level suggestions. If you are open to any of them, I can re-write these into something more concrete, e.g. with suggestions on method signature changes, or additional methods, to support these things.

• Circuit breaker; right now it's possible to link associations for an infinite loop. If we could replace the AssociationExtractor extractor, we could easily build it ourselves (see below).
• Difficult to replace AssociationExtractor with a custom extractor. Maybe one could allow extensions to replace both the association and field extractors?
• Blueprinter.configure is global, if we optionally set this on a base class instead, it would make it easier to use multiple realms of blueprints, within a single code base.
  • More specifically, we have two separate APIs and would like to use blueprinter for both, but they'd be two sets of classes. So if we could have BlueprinterAbstractA < Blueprinter::Base and then BlueprinterAbstractB < Blueprinter::Base, then something like Api1UserBlueprinter < BlueprinterAbstractA and for the other API Api2UserBlueprinter < BlueprinterAbstractB.
• local_options not passed to the global if

Again, these are just jotted down. If you are open to considering them, I can provide more detailed suggestions.

[jmeridth]

@sandstrom great suggestion on the repo changes. Done.

• The wiki was very outdated. Good call.
• We aren't using projects currently but may later
• Agreed on discussions. Not everything fits into an issue but I've also seen discussions
• become unwieldy.
  • another maintainer asked if our discord server could serve this purpose (button on README to get to Discord server)

Thank you.

Feature suggestions: I'd suggest a new issue with title feat: xxxx for each one. wdyt?

[sandstrom]

Agreed on discussions. Not everything fits into an issue but I've also seen discussions become unwieldy.

@jmeridth For discussions, I'd basically open the tab, and never look at it. Don't feel any obligation to answer anything or moderate -- I'd even say it's a mistake as a maintainer to spend any time on the discussions, better spend it on higher-leverage things.

Basically it'll just be a place for the community to ask questions and answer others. Sort of like a 'stack overflow' scoped to this project.

---

I've opened new issues, with some suggestions. Happy to discuss all of them in more detail!

• Move global configuration #403
• Extractor configurability #404
• Separate internal options from external ones #405
• Deprecate DateTimeFormatter #406
• Implement association as it's own thing #407

Closing this issue now.

[jmeridth]

@sandstrom that's fair re: discussions. I do think maintainers have to pay attention to it to ensure no one is violating the code of conduct. Hopefully things will get reported but not always.

Thank you for splitting out the issues. It is appreciated.

[sandstrom]

@jmeridth Just curious, have you had time to look at any of the issues listed above?

Happy to hear your thoughts, and if any of them seems reasonable to you, me or a colleague can flesh out some more details (will take a few days), ping you on the issue again for your feedback/approval, and then put together a PR with tests.

[jmeridth]

@sandstrom I'd suggest pinging @lessthanjacob @njbbaer @ritikesh on these.

[sandstrom]

Thanks, will do!