Hey guys, I've been working on a project which is a (mostly) drop in replacement for Catalyst::Plugin::Session. Here are the GitHub repos:
https://github.com/bluefeet/Web-Starch https://github.com/bluefeet/Web-Starch-Store-CHI https://github.com/bluefeet/Web-Starch-Store-AmazonDynamoDB https://github.com/bluefeet/Web-Starch-Plugin-Sereal https://github.com/bluefeet/Catalyst-Plugin-Starch The manual is a good place to start: https://github.com/bluefeet/Web-Starch/blob/master/lib/Web/Starch/Manual.pod I'm using this @work and will be deploying it to production, replacing Catalyst::Plugin::Session, sometime next week if all goes well this week. I've not put these modules on CPAN yet as I'd love some feedback before I do so. I want to make sure the module names, the interfaces, and just the entire design are acceptable to people. I want this to be a real step forward. @work we've made extensive use of Catalyst::Plugin::Sesssion for years now, and related modules such as Catalyst::Plugin::Authentication. So far everything has "just worked" when I replaced Catalyst::Plugin::Session with Catalyst::Plugin::Starch. Why do this? - Catalyst::Plugin::Session (C:P:S) is slower in NYTProf reports than I would expect it to be. - C:P:S is tied into Catalyst. This is unnecessary. Catalyst should be used to glue things together, not as a platform to build whole technologies on. By decoupling sessions from Catalyst many wins can be had in reusability and unit testing (etc?). - C:P:S can be difficult and messy to extend. This is partly due to how Catalyst plugins work, but also due to the design of C:P:S. Aran
_______________________________________________ List: [email protected] Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
