[Maypole] 2.05 bug in Maypole::View::Base?

[Dave Howorth]

>> I just ran into this in a bad way. I upgraded to 2.06 and whamo, a 
>> number of pages no longer worked for me. I finally tracked it down to 
>> this 'description' bug. Now I've got 2 lines I have to regularly 
>> comment out of Maypole::View::Base::vars - 'description' and 'cgi'.
>>
>> It would be really nice to be able to have column named 'description' 
>> without having to hack Maypole...

I wrote:

> I would also vote that being able to have a column called description is 
> the priority. Perhaps the class method can be renamed something less 
> likely to conflict, like maypole_model_class_description()?  That can't 
> cause backwards compatibility problems since in previous releases it 
> wasn't implemented properly anyway!

I thought about this overnight and would like to change my vote. Instead 
of renaming the class description method, I suggest we trash it! There 
are two reasons:

1/ Unnecessary complexity

Nobody is using this feature. The implementation has been broken for 
quite a while and nobody has complained, whereas several people have 
been using columns called 'description'. So it's just a pointless burden 
to maintain the code and documentation. It's also one more function 
point that newcomers have to learn and remember.

2/ Separation of concerns

The purpose of this method is to return a text string for display on web 
pages. Such text should be written by a web designer, not a Perl 
programmer. That way it can be easily changed when the site is 
redesigned or translated into another language. Equivalent functionality 
can easily be provided directly in TT templates. Clear separation of 
concerns is one of Maypole's primary design goals.

So I believe the best solution is just to remove the description method 
from the interface.

Cheers, Dave