Mustache has been REJECTED from boost.
First I want to thank Peter for the submission and all reviewers for their participation in the review process. Please note that votes don't just get added up, but that details of every review, especially the time & effort spent on it, will influence how reviews get weighed. This review was close, with 3 REJECT, 4 Conditional ACCEPT and 0 ACCEPT votes. Rene, Jens and Darryl voted to accept on the condition that the documentation shall be improved/completed. Ruben's review had more complex conditions, among them this one:
1. The partials argument must be typed according to the data structure it requires. Peter's response to this was "I don't see how this is supposed to be accomplished." I don't know what to make of the technical details here, but I don't think I can make something that might be impossible to accomplish a condition for acceptance.
Julien & Vinnie voted to REJECT based on the state of the library, which makes me believe they might change their vote in a future review. Dmitry voted to REJECT based on the mustache language itself, and thus was the only one to reject boost.mustache in general. Based on the almost even split between conditional accept & reject and the lack of unconditional accepts, I decided to REJECT the library at this time. I hope Peter will submit an improved & extended version of this library for review in the future.
On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 5:28 AM Klemens Morgenstern via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Julien & Vinnie voted to REJECT based on the state of the library, which makes me believe they might change their vote in a future review.
Speaking for myself, this is correct. A templating engine is an obviously useful library given the existing set of network related libraries already in Boost. I would have instead chosen conditional acceptance if there were just one or two narrowly focused issues, but this was not the case. I have complete confidence that the next time we see this library it will "walk on water" so to speak. Thank you to Peter and Klemens for your time investment. Regards
Le dimanche 19 février 2023 à 06:44 -0800, Vinnie Falco via Boost a écrit :
On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 5:28 AM Klemens Morgenstern via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Julien & Vinnie voted to REJECT based on the state of the library, which makes me believe they might change their vote in a future review.
I have complete confidence that the next time we see this library it will "walk on water" so to speak.
That's correct for me as well. From the last messages of Peter, I understand that strict mustache conformance is not a goal. The addition of a filter like mechanism as an extension to the spec, and probably some way to differently treat first/last item of a sequence like someone suggested, would drastically change the usefulness of this library. At least for me it would change from “I can't use it” to “it's not ideal, but it's useful”.
Thank you to Peter and Klemens for your time investment.
Yes, many thanks to both. Regards, Julien
Julien Blanc wrote:
From the last messages of Peter, I understand that strict mustache conformance is not a goal.
It was certainly a goal for the initial version of the library. I didn't want to add any extensions until I had the base functionality (as per the spec) implemented correctly. Since Mustache is so simple and so... not rigidly defined, it's easy to implement something Mustache-like but not quite. I didn't want that.
On 21/02/2023 03:20, Peter Dimov wrote:
Since Mustache is so simple and so... not rigidly defined, it's easy to implement something Mustache-like but not quite. I didn't want that.
It does feel like a bit of a half-baked language, though. It mixes a lot of presentation aspects into the input data model instead of the template (where it should rightly be), probably mostly because in JS it's more commonplace to morph input data since it's all free-form anyway. As such it doesn't really seem like a language that ought to be implemented in anything but JS.
On Sun, 19 Feb 2023 at 14:27, Klemens Morgenstern. wrote:
First I want to thank Peter for the submission and all reviewers for their participation in the review process.
Klemens, thank you for your efforts, priceless! I hope, Peter will consider re-submission of his Mustache ;) in not too distant future. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
Mateusz Loskot wrote:
On Sun, 19 Feb 2023 at 14:27, Klemens Morgenstern. wrote:
First I want to thank Peter for the submission and all reviewers for their participation in the review process.
Klemens, thank you for your efforts, priceless!
I hope, Peter will consider re-submission of his Mustache ;) in not too distant future.
Well this one has been mercilessly shaved by the reviewers so I'll need some time to grow another.
participants (6)
-
Gavin Lambert -
Julien Blanc -
Klemens Morgenstern -
Mateusz Loskot -
Peter Dimov -
Vinnie Falco