Open abargnesi opened 8 years ago
@nbargnesi @wshayes thoughts on this?
Seems like you're driving bel.rb towards a pluggable and extensible BEL Swiss Army Knife, so this make sense. It does make bel.rb inherently more elegant and maintainable. There's a cost in managing the other projects and the added dependencies and lifecycles. Even with the cost, I'm in favor of it.
I could see having a gem that just groups all translators together too, along with whatever other plugin categories might exist. E.g., bel-translators
.
Great idea! :clap:
I'm in favor of grouping together commonly-used plugins.
Thanks for the feedback.
Punting this for now due to necessary bugfixing within BEL to RDF conversion (#65, #66, #69).
What?
bel.rb provides the following RDF functionality:
These features have been integrated within bel.rb with a soft dependency on other gems (e.g. rdf, addressable, uuid, rdf-turtle). Additionally the rdf-mongo is used as a soft dependency when enabling the Mongo RDF Repository plugin (e.g.
BEL::RdfRepository::Plugins::Mongo
).To me this is is starting to feel unmanageable and hard to communicate to users.
Here I am suggesting that the RDF translator and Mongo RDF Repository be moved to separate gems. They will both declare hard dependencies on the gems they need.
Why?
bel
andbel-translator-rdf
.