Re: [cgi-prototype-users] Prototyping CGI versus CGI::Prototype

[Terrence B. <met...@gm...>]

Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> The heir apparent to the CGI::Prototype namespace should support
> Class::Prototype-styled objects. 
Right. I'm not suggesting an heir apparent. I'm suggesting an additional 
module in the distribution, along with associated test suite.
This module would extend on the other concept of "CGI Prototype" - 
prototyping the CGI process. Not using CGI with prototyped objects.
Also, people tend to look down on modules whose release date is more 
than 6 months old. It starts to look unmaintained.

I dont want to fork and start a separate distro, just add 
CGI::Prototype::Moose to the CGIP distro.
> I have customers that are making use of the
> Class::Prototyped features that are not classical class-instance structures,
> so any "replacement" of CGIP with something new must be carefully considered.
>
>   
right and a toy example exemplifying the need for non classical 
class-instance structures in the standard docs or a magazine article would
help greatly. I did talk to Jason Purdy above his negative CPAN ratings 
review of CGIP <http://cpanratings.perl.org/dist/CGI-Prototype>.

He wrote his 'review' after skimming the docs. Now, I dont think that 
what he did was fair or thoroughly researched, but I think a section in 
the docs like "Why Another Framework" or "How is CGIP Different" would 
go a long way towards stamping out superficial inspection of the module.