Mercurial > hg > bitsyblog
view roadmap.txt @ 49:4efeb3ecab7a
bump version
author | k0s <k0scist@gmail.com> |
---|---|
date | Sat, 26 Dec 2009 13:08:48 -0500 |
parents | e3823be6a423 |
children |
line wrap: on
line source
bitsyblog, middleware, and the roadmap to the future the nice thing with working like software like bitsyblog is that the intent of the software is clear. bitsyblog aims to provide a solution for users to keep a log of their activities on the web. When thinking of software in terms of the narrow intent of a component, it becomes much easier to divine what sort of framework would look like around it and how this framework might be applicable to other types of software. Firstly, I noticed that the bitsyblog component app is not as small as it could be. bitsyblog provides a multi-user solution to (personal) blogging. This level of solution should exist, but thinking in terms of components it is easy to see that users may want a personal blog that is not multi-user. lammy wants a blog on his desktop computer. When at his computer, he probably wants to be logged in all the time (always accept connections from 127.0.0.1). He doesn't want other people to be able to make a blog there. When not at his desktop, he wants to be able to login and post through the web and maybe used the blogme.py script too. In bitsyblog terms, '/lammy' becomes '/' and all urls ('preferences', 'post', 'css/') become relative to this. Doing this involves separating out the individual blog components from the multi-user component and probably having different .ini files from which to run paste. I've also realized that the way I handle CSS is a solution to a problem that has nothing to do with bitsyblog. The other items in preferences ('date', 'subject', but not 'friends' which has to do with roles) are about formatting the blog posts. The CSS is about themeing pages which has nothing to do with blog posts. So what is needed is a CSS component, which is possibly linked to from the preferences page. Lets put this at '/lammy/css'. This pages may have the fields for preferences, but also provides an interface for managing the CSS. A user may want to delete CSS or edit them, render the current page with a selected stylesheet or what's in the editor, or render an arbitrary web page This is like CSS zen garden, but more interactive, and (optionally) allowing the user to save the CSS and apply it to their pages. I can also imagine, in a 2.0 version, an implementation that allows permits transforming of CSS to suitable to theming a page with a stylesheet intended for another page. One has a stylesheet with a bunch of rules. Using javascript, one mouses over the DOM of the other page. The rules are modified in order to applied to the appropriate container on the page. This sounds much like what deliverance is supposed to do, and maybe it could be utilized for this intent, though perhaps the intents are different and its better not to use it (to be investigated). Both of the above components fall into a general pattern: there is a component which is the multi-user blog manager. Lets call this bitsyblog. There are microcomponents, the single-user blog (lets call this microblog) and the CSS zen garden component which lets you play with stylesheets (I dub thee samadhi). microblog and samadhi can live on their own, in which case they live at '/', or they might be managed by an external component -- microblog by bitsyblog, or samadhi by...not really sure, either a microblog instance or bitsyblog. In the latter case, they need to know where they live. I'm not sure what provides the rewrite rule telling them where they live. Ian? Ethan? There are a few configuration type details -- like auth, whether samadhi needs to know about where to put these CSS files or how bitsyusers can fetch them, but essentially if you give these the appropriate path, they should be able to work relatively independently. In a different class of components are comments and tagging. While it is easy to imagine bitsyblog managing comments and tags, it is also fairly easy to see that these services really don't need to know what is being commented or tagged on. For commenting, I imagine an app similar to smokesignals, but with a different persistence model. Lets call it commentator. Commentator is a javascript app with no intrinsic URLs. Given a set of rules (for instance, "allow commenting on <div>s with an id attribute) a block of text is shown as the last child of each <div> (or conditionally on mouseover). This will initially say something like "No comments | Add a comment" where each of these do what you think ('N comments' displays the comments, 'Add a comment' gives a textarea where you can say your mind). When a comment is added, it is put in a database (presumedly SQL, though really on a super-simple db is necessary) with the URL and/or id as its key. When the page is loaded, the text of the page is examined on response and the appropriate comments are displayed. It is also necessary to have some sort of mapping optionally between URL and id to another URI, as blog posts both are displayed as part of the user's entire blog and also have a unique URL. Notice that nothing here is particularly unique to blogs. Commenting on <div>s or <p>s in a wiki page is essentially the same (though in this case, it might be better to comment on the entire page, as these may not have ids and the page can be editted all willy-nilly like that. Commenting on individual <p>s and <div>s is, however, a really nice thing to have, so in a 2.0 type incarnation of commentator, this should be added regardless of the difficulty). If bitsyblog was part of a site with a wiki, then commentator could deal with them both nicely. Optionally, one might specify the rule that if an item had comments, it either could not be deleted or that an alert would pop up before deletion with [Confirm] and [Cancel] buttons. This is easy to do if a browser could do a DELETE request and things behaved all RESTful. Otherwise, this would also be a non-trivial problem. Tagging is very similar to commentator, though it might have a few intrinsic URLs too. You specify a similar set of rules concerning what can be tagged ("all <div>s with ids in /%(user)s/ and /%(user)s/200*") and a method pointing the ids to URLs. Then you have a database, which again is pretty simple and again in its simplest form could be a dictionary. Though here, the tags are the keys and the URLs are the values. You could also record number of tags per item, specify whether non-authenticated members can tag, etc. As the first or last child of each (say) <div>, you have what it has been tagged with, maybe weighted by how many times it has been tagged. You have a URL for searching by tags, maybe on a per-path basis ("I want to see all the tags under /k0s that have been tagged with 'cats' and 'cute'"). You could also have a URL for the tag cloud. Again, what is being tagged is pretty divorced from the tagging component itself (lets call it tagit, unless that name is taken). I have presented samadhi as being managed by bitsyblog or microblog and commentator and tagit living outside of bitsyblog in the middleware stack. I've done this because this "feels right" to me right now, though I reseve my right to change my mind about it. The thing I want emphasize is the difference in the two approaches: * When a WSGI app is "managed" by another component app, the manager has to know about the managed app and dispatch the appropriate information (request, etc) to it, though in doing so it has the opportunity to have more control over the URL structure and what the component app does. It is also easier to return HTML this way. * When a WSGI "app" is used as middleware and needs to markup the returned page in HTML, this is conducive to using javascript in order to insert nodes into the DOM dynamically, presumedly based on some rule set. Alternatively, the middleware may decompose the page with lxml and insert HTML where it needs to go that way. In this approach, the middleware need not have a URL (this may be preferable). It is not necessarily clear to me at this time which approach is better for different apps. I have put commenting and tagging in the latter category because commenting and tagging on web pages seems divorced (save by a rule set) from what is being commented on or tagged. I have put microblog in the first category because it is clearly in the same layer of software as bitsyblog, and some management tasks will be necessary even for microblog. samadhi I put in the first category as well (though I hesistate right now) because otherwise the rewriting of URLs makes me nervous. Perhaps there is need of a WSGI dispatcher that fetches apps based on some sort of rule concerning the URL? Also, it seems necessary to put the CSS on user data. This could also be accomplished the other way: 1. abstract out members and roles (teamroler?) and store the data (CSS, etc) on them here; 2. have samadhi write a defined set of urls (how defined? not sure) including the stylesheets that it knows about, presumedly putting the 'foo' stylesheet at '/lammy/css/foo.css'. This still involves samadhi knowing something about the url structure, and now it is dependent on the user/role thing, though this could be a configuration option. This is the middleware story. Other things could also be done internally to bitsyblog and its supporting software to make the experience more seamless. I am bothered by the fact that the logic supporting the form and user settings is somewhat divorced. Ideally, rendering the form should do all the validation and return the settings in a sensible way to use. I don't think this is hard -- the settings.py should just be incorporated into markup.form. This goes some ways to reinventing things like formencode and zope.schema, so if we can get these to do what we want, maybe we shouldn't write our own. But at cursory glance, formencode won't and zope.schema isn't easily usable outside of zope. So maybe rolling our own isn't bad. There's more middleware, but its hidden and is a bad coupling (that is, the app will depend on the middleware unless its done cleverly). The site nav does not appear on '/login' or '/join' (or any url not specified internally to bitsyblog, for that matter). It would be conceivable to have a SiteNav middleware that (either through javascript or lxml decomposition) writes the site nav at the top of the screen. bistyblog and bitsyauth would have to know about this though, so that they could add the relevent links into environ. Maybe this isn't horrible, but it seems so. Likewise, the site css doesn't show up here. Should it? Is this another piece of middleware or part of samadhi? An important piece of middleware should involve members and roles. I really don't want to write this one, but I would like to consume it. It should live just inside of bitsyauth and make the users.py file unnecessary. It might be better to sit on this one until last. So should be bitsyblog 2.0. There are a few other streamlining things (see the TODO.txt), but if all of this was implemented, bitsyblog would be a rich web experience that was highly componentized with each of the components doing one thing well. Moreso, since coupling is avoided, save through configuration, auth, and other loose links, each of these components could be used independently of bitsyblog or turned off without undesirable consequences. At least as much as being a good blogging app, bitsyblog is about elegant design and component architecture. This roadmap shows what is possible in terms of having a fully functional blogging application with middleware that can be used outside of just bitsyblog. To take the other end of the spectrum, wordpress says "Hey, write plugins that will make me work better." As a programmer, I really hate this approach. If I write a commenting plugin for wordpress, then I have just that. If I want to use it to comment on a wiki page, I'm out of luck. If I write commenting middleware, then it can be used for any WSGI app with minimal configuration. As a programmer, I generally want the freedom to assemble a webapp however I want. With this freedom comes some work, but for me its a worthy sacrifice. As a web consumer, I understand that site administrators want out of the box solutions. bitsyblog will offer this too. The default deployment of bitsyblog will pull down commentator, samadhi, and tagit and have an .ini file pointing to the appropriate factory to create the chain of middleware to have all of these pieces in place. There is no contradiction.