On Mar 18, 2005, at 9:46 PM, Michael Watkins wrote:

>
>> might lead to a stricter definition of what a Quixote
>> application is, stripping us of some of the our current freedom in
>> designing applications.
>
> That would be my fear. I didn't choose *other* frameworks because I
> didn't
> like whatever design choices or technology constraints they had made.

I would like to second what Mike says.  I liked Quixote since it was a
simple framework with enough hooks to allow me add the functions I
needed.  I was also moving from another framework that required a lot
of complexity to do simple things.  In the end it became too difficult
to do anything.

I like the idea of having a set of external additions that are
relatively independent.  This would allow new users to add
sessions/persistence/authentication etc. 'off the shelf' or have good
examples to use as a base for their own implementations.  It would also
provide the quixote core a test suite to check changes against.

--Bill