- bookshelf is not actively maintained.
- bookshelf use deprecated prototype. ghost source code is too.
- so many type errors.
Are you referring to the ORM layer?
yes. I am reviewing ghost source code step by step. so painful to review.
Why? I’m sure there are better ways to make a positive contribution to the project than providing a critique. Your stats say it all.
I hope I can rewrite the ghost source code. but now I do have not much time. By itself, the source code has so many problems. deprecated prototype design pattern, many files have no meaning. many dependent libraries are not actively maintained. so many problems. oh my god.
1 Like
What qualifies you to say such things?
By all means contribute some improvements. Otherwise I recommend reading these links before writing further comments on our forum:
1 Like
so the ghost can give up bookshelf, but need my contribution, right?
Scrambles to commit code and grabs popcorn
You know, almost any code anywhere can be made better: refactoring, updating libraries, doing scan tests to see which parts are slow, and so on.
And most developers I’ve ever worked with (including myself) appreciate good suggestions that are offered in a collegial manner, such as “Have you thought of changing this loop here?”
But to roll into a public forum and call out the development team in the way you did, broadly critical and with an OMG tone, is really not very helpful. In fact, it’s actually pretty arrogant.
So how about trying again, this time with actual suggestions and an attitude of making it better for everyone?
5 Likes
I hope I can make contributions to ghost core code in the future.
by the way, can you answer this problem?