Is Clay project alive?

Jan 21, 2011 at 7:11 PM

Question say it all. I don't see much activity there at all.

Coordinator
Jan 21, 2011 at 7:29 PM

Clay is an essential part of Orchard but as far as we can tell it works fine, which explains the low activity. Louis actually developed Clay as part of Orchard but we thought it could be useful in lots of other contexts so we took it out as a separate project. We do have some plans to improve debuggability of Clay objects. We'll also take a look at the existing issues and discussions.

Jan 21, 2011 at 7:34 PM

Cool, thank you, I've been posting there, but no answers, so I though that it was dead. I just started playing with it yesterday, and I can see a LOT of opportunities for my project using this library. Just wanted to make sure it was alive and well. I am currently experimenting providing getter and setter implementations for properties with Func/Action and forwarding calls to a prop getters/setter to these delegates. 

Coordinator
Jan 21, 2011 at 7:37 PM

That would be a fantastic extension.

Jan 21, 2011 at 7:56 PM

I actually got it to work, at least first unit test passed. I wanted somebody to take a look at it and see if it is something that is of interest to you. It will work for my needs, but I know there is a bigger picture to be considered. Let me know.

 

Coordinator
Jan 21, 2011 at 7:59 PM

Push a fork?

Jan 21, 2011 at 8:04 PM

Ok,  I've never done it before, will have to wait till I get home.

Jan 21, 2011 at 11:49 PM

Excuse my ignorance, but how do I fork it in mercurial? I tried pushing changes but I get the message that user is not set up

pushing to https://hg01.codeplex.com/clay

searching for changes

1 changesets found

http authorization required

realm: hg01.codeplex.com

abort: authorization failed[command interrupted]

Coordinator
Jan 22, 2011 at 12:01 AM

Those instructions are specifically for Orchard but should be easy enough to translate to Clay

http://www.orchardproject.net/docs/Contributing-patches.ashx

Jan 22, 2011 at 12:31 AM

Cool, thank you for your help. I just pushed it out. Changes that I made now allow definition of the methods on the type as well as definition of getters/setters for properties. Getters/setters rely on the convention and basically forward calls to Func/Action delegates defined on the type.  

Coordinator
Jan 22, 2011 at 12:45 AM

Thanks for submitting the patch.