As a new contributor to the project, while trying to understand the application's architecture and dependencies, I found it difficult to gain a high-level understanding of the application's architecture by looking at the current Gemfile. The gems are not organized or categorized in a manner that makes it easy to identify their purpose or the application components they relate to. For instance:
rack-timeout is placed near the top, while rack-canonical-host is located further down in the Gemfile. Both of these gems are related to Rack middleware.
omniauth, omniauth-rails_csrf_protection, and omniauth-github are placed at the bottom of the Gemfile, while devise is placed a bit further up. All these gems are related to authentication and authorization.
sassc, sassc-rails, sprockets, and sprockets-rails are related to asset management but are separated at the top and bottom of the Gemfile, making it difficult to understand their relationship.
While categorizing the gems, I realized that it improves maintainability by providing a clearer understanding of each gem's purpose and usage. This organization makes it evident which gems might not belong in the global namespace and should be moved to more specific environment groups. For example, after categorizing the gems, it becomes apparent that minitest would be better suited in the "test" group, and yard documentation should be placed in the "development" group. This organization ensures better dependency management and maintainability within the project.
I noticed that while categorizing the gems, there can be cases where a gem could fit into more than one category, such as rack-mini-profiler. Although it is a middleware, it primarily serves the purpose of performance monitoring. In such cases, I have made a decision based on the gem's primary function and used my best judgment. I'm open to discussion and feedback from the maintainers and other contributors to ensure the most appropriate categorization for each gem.
As a new contributor to the project, while trying to understand the application's architecture and dependencies, I found it difficult to gain a high-level understanding of the application's architecture by looking at the current Gemfile. The gems are not organized or categorized in a manner that makes it easy to identify their purpose or the application components they relate to. For instance:
rack-timeoutis placed near the top, whilerack-canonical-hostis located further down in the Gemfile. Both of these gems are related to Rack middleware.omniauth,omniauth-rails_csrf_protection, andomniauth-githubare placed at the bottom of the Gemfile, whiledeviseis placed a bit further up. All these gems are related to authentication and authorization.sassc,sassc-rails,sprockets, andsprockets-railsare related to asset management but are separated at the top and bottom of the Gemfile, making it difficult to understand their relationship.While categorizing the gems, I realized that it improves maintainability by providing a clearer understanding of each gem's purpose and usage. This organization makes it evident which gems might not belong in the global namespace and should be moved to more specific environment groups. For example, after categorizing the gems, it becomes apparent that
minitestwould be better suited in the "test" group, andyarddocumentation should be placed in the "development" group. This organization ensures better dependency management and maintainability within the project.I noticed that while categorizing the gems, there can be cases where a gem could fit into more than one category, such as
rack-mini-profiler. Although it is a middleware, it primarily serves the purpose of performance monitoring. In such cases, I have made a decision based on the gem's primary function and used my best judgment. I'm open to discussion and feedback from the maintainers and other contributors to ensure the most appropriate categorization for each gem.