Added gsoc entries

1 files changed, 64 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/gsoc/2011-06-29-status-report-5.org b/gsoc/2011-06-29-status-report-5.org
new file mode 100755
index 0000000..ce563f4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gsoc/2011-06-29-status-report-5.org
@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+#+title:         Status Report for Week #5
+#+date:          2011-06-29
+#+layout:        post
+#+category:      gsoc
+
+For Week #5, there was more testing, but these time for
+=Dancer::Script= in a real working environment. But, =bin/dancer=
+script was also tested as part of the Dancer application creation in
+this step-by-step scaffolding process.
+
+While my mentors were at the [[http://journeesperl.fr/fpw2011/][French Perl Workshop]], I met with my
+mentors, and discussed what I was working on, and what was next. In
+that meeting, =sawyer= pointed out several problems with the tests,
+and the way I added several variables and broke the tests files.
+=franck= did a review on a code I wrote to check the =name= variable
+supplied by the user. For that commit, here is the [[https://github.com/gnusosa/Dancer/commit/7560b3aff69160b9b44d9e53f8ab393b5880806e][link]].
+
+*** What I worked on Week #5
+
+So more then working on writing code, I tested Dancer::Script and the
+method =run_scaffold= against working Dancer applications. For
+example, this blog was running with =Dancer::Script=, and I tried on
+another working application for the same purpose. They all run
+correctly. The only problem that was occurring when loading the
+module, was a horrible message of Subroutine's stacking each other. In
+a [[https://github.com/gnusosa/Dancer/commit/d5aeb954583354b0b69c09413cae3c5d17797204][single commit]], it was fixed by =sawyer=.
+
+Upon having a successful day testing Dancer applications, I went back
+to test the scaffolding process of creating a working Dancer
+application. I discovered a bug, and another problem with the logic
+for selecting the correct Dancer MyApp.pm without a directory, all
+dependent on the =name= given by the user. Let me explain more about
+the problem, so given a name to =bin/dancer= script like this
+=Foo::Bar=, this name will produce =../Foo-Bar/lib/Foo/Bar.pm=. That
+is what is expected. But, if you entered =Foo= only, its output
+=../Foo/lib/Foo/Foo.pm= when the correct structure is
+=../Foo/lib/Foo.pm=. Which breaks the call in =app.pl= for =Foo=
+package in the =lib= dir. So what I did was just added some simple
+logic to select the correct way it should be structured. You can find
+it in this [[https://github.com/gnusosa/Dancer/commit/e889f8018abecf93e6b45d1afdcec3e8c6b09743][commit]].
+
+So after this several commits, the module =Dancer::Script= and the
+=run_scaffold= method runs as expected.
+
+*** What's next?
+
+For week #6, the following are the key points:
+
+        - Add an upgrade log file.
+        - Add a built log file.
+        - Add tests to each log creation process.
+
+I'm currently working in a way to use the write methods from
+=Dancer::Script= to write the logs needed. Well see what I get, I will
+commit soon about the usage of such methods. Probably use =write_file=
+method, and print out everything to it.
+
+Aside from the work, I seem to be back-on-track and on-point, not
+ahead of the schedule, but a bit further then current week. All to the
+help of my mentors. Thank you, Franck and Sawyer.
+
+The Shout'out goes to [[https://github.com/hobbestigrou][hobbestigrou]], creator of [[https://github.com/hobbestigrou/Dancer-Plugin-Feed][Dancer::Plugin::Feed]]
+and other plugins. For letting me use [[https://github.com/hobbestigrou/MahewinSexyUrl][MahewinSexyURL]] to test
+Dancer::Script on a working application.