Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove client-side libs panel #107

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Aug 13, 2019

Conversation

@RubenVerborgh
Copy link
Member

commented Aug 13, 2019

It's not really a thing.

@RubenVerborgh RubenVerborgh requested a review from jeff-zucker Aug 13, 2019

@Mitzi-Laszlo Mitzi-Laszlo merged commit 18299f4 into master Aug 13, 2019

@jeff-zucker

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Aug 13, 2019

@Mitzi-Laszlo - you merged this? Before I even get a chance to respond to the suggestion to remove that was posted while I was asleep and acted on before I got up? One reason I believe that this should not be removed is the question of repos - currently tools are scattered everywhere, isn't there an advantage to having them in one repo? I would also like to hear from some of the other tool developers before closing this as a panel - @0tto_aa, @bourgeoa, @noeldmartin, @jucole who posted in the forum just yesterday that he thought this panel was a good idea. I would also like to hear what the reason for the panel was to begin with and why those reasons no longer apply. Is it because there has been no action so far? It's August and many people, including me, are temporarily away or otherwise occupied.

@RubenVerborgh RubenVerborgh deleted the feature/remove-client-side-libs-panel branch Aug 13, 2019

@jeff-zucker

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Aug 13, 2019

Another reason I believe it is important to have a panel on libraries is that choosing libraries is a critical for app developers and rather than each library developer saying "use mine, use mine" it makes more sense to have a coordinated approach listing the strengths and weaknesses of the various tools.

@RubenVerborgh

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Aug 13, 2019

I would also like to hear what the reason for the panel was to begin with

My impression was that it had emerged from a misunderstanding, namely me trying to organize the repositories at https://github.com/solid/information/blob/master/repo-overview.md by tagging leftovers with "client-side library". That seemed to have been understood as me proposing a client-side library panel.

There is definitely a need for organizing the repositories we have, but that might be broader than just client-side libs.

So good idea, and my suggestion for closing this panel was not related to that.

@jeff-zucker

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Aug 13, 2019

Thanks for the explanation. I think that combining "leftovers" with client-side libraries is part of the problem. I believe we want to encourage app developers to use standard libraries where possible and the only way to do that is by being clear what libraries are available and what the differences are between them are. As a library developer, I'm always unsure whether my projects are useful in a bigger picture or just distractions and I could use the guidance of people like @RubenVerborgh and the other developers. I also believe that there are many spots where we would want multiple libraries to work e.g. multiple kinds of fetch libraries or apps that can take either rdflib or comunica as parsers. To get those kinds of plug-and-play scenarios takes coordination among projects and this seems like the place that coordination should happen.

@jeff-zucker

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Aug 13, 2019

OTOH, if these things are better discussed elsewhere, I'm open to that too.

@JordanShurmer

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 13, 2019

I'm not sure a "panel" would be appropriate for this group of people discussing client side libraries, but I am def interested in discussions/plans/etc. around that topic.

I think the "panels" are meant to be more official and focused around document proposal sort of work though.

@jeff-zucker

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Aug 13, 2019

Good point about documentation, @JordanShurmer. I think an "intro to Solid tools and libraries" is a much needed documentation piece. I've made some starts at it but it is hard to even know what all the tools are and how they relate so it should be a group project. Seems to me that the questions are unique to tools and distinct from a more general apps panel.

@Julian-Cole

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 13, 2019

The main reason why I posted on the forum that I thought it was a good idea was because I was hoping that a panel, either in the formal or informal sense would recon / plan / prioritise / avoid lib duplication of the most needed libraries, and also for the other reasons @jeff-zucker puts forward.
And Jeff your work on your libraries is spot-on!

@Vinnl

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Aug 14, 2019

Another reason I believe it is important to have a panel on libraries is that choosing libraries is a critical for app developers

I think it's a good idea for library authors to coordinate, so this is not a riff on this panel. When it comes to helping app developers pick, however, that might be more relevant to/require alignment with the Teaching Material Panel?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
6 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.