Libraries, Patterns, and Puppies
by Greg Vaughn
I’ve published an Elixir github repository called Quest that I’m not certain what to do with. Primarily I think of it as a pattern, not a library, though it could probably be developed into a library. My thoughts lately have made me more wary of libraries than I used to be.
Once upon a time the Free Software movement and Open Source movement had a slogan to distinguish one from the other: “free as in freedom vs. free as in beer.” I don’t wish to discuss those ideological differences, but mention that for some historical grounding. I’ve since heard, but forgotten the original source of the simile: “free as in puppy.” This suggests that adding some library to your project means that you are taking on some long term maintenance responsibilities. Younger me and the teams I was on have dealt with the pain of deep, convoluted dependency trees that became a source of inertia holding the project back because it was too much work relative to the gain to upgrade to a new version of a primary library/framework we were using. If we had been a bit more wary of each dependency as we added it and asked ourselves if perhaps we should instead write and own that functionality ourselves, then we might have overall improved the long term velocity of our project precisely because we did not have to wait for (or fork) the library in order for its depedencies to be compatible with the rest of our set.
I love puppies! Puppies are great! I am not suggesting that we never use third party libraries in our projects, but instead that we be more thoughtful of which ones and how many we choose to adopt. We should be aware of those short term vs. long term considerations. We should think about the knowlege and skill gained if we ourselves write that portion of functionality we need out of the whole set a library might provide. That brings me to thoughts of my Quest repository.
Forgive me for throwing out yet another old saying: “Give someone a fish, feed them for a day. Teach them how to fish, feed them for a lifetime.” Giving someone a pattern is more like teaching them how to fish, while giving them a library is like giving them a fish. In the culture of some programming languages it is common to see API client libraries that are for one specific service, like a Twitter client library, or Github, etc. but with Quest I’m not providing any concrete implementation for any specific service. Instead it provides a struct that can describe any HTTP API call along with examples of how to interact with it. The value it offers is packaging what is conceptually an action into a thing, a data structure. Doing this allows for reusable infrastructure for dealing with HTTP calls, and even allows for concurrent tests without any mocking library.
Help me decide. Does this mesh with your view of third party libraries? Should I develop Quest into a library and publish on hex? Can I do that and still provide the didactic goal of the pattern? Is it better to treat it as a tutorial repo?
I have no comments on this blog, but you can find me as gregvaughn on Twitter, Elixir Slack, ElixirForum.tags: elixir - pattern