I'd like to question where the framework is going. It's now going so far to become 'independent' of the CMS system (yes I know in some ways that it's supposed to be used separately to the CMS system e.g. ebay etc.) that I'm questioning whether this latest version will be of any use to the Joomla system.
Presumably Joomla 4.0 will be the earliest version that can use the new Joomla Framework - and that will be using all the currently existing classes (and perhaps a few new ones/replacement ones for any deprecated classes that come between now and then).
So whats the release cycle for the framework going to be like?
Is it going to be slowly incrementing versions - like the Platform currently is - for example for Joomla CMS 4.0->4.1 how are we going to make sure there aren't too many backward compatibility issues?
However its 18 months till Jooma 4.0 comes out (all things staying as they are) and in that time I guess theirs a lot of time for big new developments to happen in the Joomla Framework.
So how do we make sure that the Framework at least stays (roughly) on the same path as the CMS.
Because if Joomla Framework goes in a different direction to the CMS the only thing to link the two things would be a name (Joomla).
Already with things like JError/Exceptions (Joomla 2.5/3.0), JInput/JRequest (Joomla 2.5/Magic Quotes) we've found places where the Platform team are miles ahead of the CMS team - and the CMS team have had to play catch up with extra statements and stuff that I can imagine the Framework may well accelerate this further!
I guess chiefly my concern is that give it another cycle or two of Joomla versions and we'll find the Framework and CMS at such different stages that the Framework will split up and we'll find ourselves with half the number of developers etc. in that respect.
My final question/issue is in what I do in terms of developing extensions. Documentation. Whilst the platform manuals are useful - I've found them to be far from complete - and there has been little on the Joomla Docs! site with the new platform features - so it's actually becoming an issue to code for Joomla 2.5/3.0 extensions in terms of limited documentation.
How are you guys proposing to build documentation for your system.
For example the issue I posted here ( https://github.com/joomla/joomla-platform/pull/1810 ) where JFactory::getUser has changed in some aspects means I now have to use JUser::getInstance for example - which is much well less documented - I can only find a brief summary on the API page.
It would be really nice to have full and proper documenation for this stuff again. Rather than a class which I have to trawl through every time - and may not even have what I want in it! I'd be interested to hear your comments on this
This sounds like massive moan - but I promise its not! I'm just (personally) feel Joomla primarily is about the CMS system (although clearly the standalone Platform/Framework has its advantages) and I'd like to see how you guys feel this is going to fit into the grand scheme of that.
I'd like to question where the framework is going. It's now going so far to become 'independent' of the CMS system (yes I know in some ways that it's supposed to be used separately to the CMS system e.g. ebay etc.) that I'm questioning whether this latest version will be of any use to the Joomla system.
If it were up to me, I'd take the work the platform is currently doing - separating each of the packages into independent, but cohesive, packages, -- and I'd immediately pull them back together into "the platform" - and put it right back under the CMS.On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:53 AM, George Wilson <georgeja...@googlemail.com> wrote:
I'd like to question where the framework is going. It's now going so far to become 'independent' of the CMS system (yes I know in some ways that it's supposed to be used separately to the CMS system e.g. ebay etc.) that I'm questioning whether this latest version will be of any use to the Joomla system.
That way, people will get it
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Joomla! Platform Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/joomla-dev-platform/4Q0eu4G7NWI/unsubscribe?hl=en.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to joomla-dev-plat...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
I'd like to question where the framework is going. It's now going so far to become 'independent' of the CMS system (yes I know in some ways that it's supposed to be used separately to the CMS system e.g. ebay etc.) that I'm questioning whether this latest version will be of any use to the Joomla system.
Just a point of clarification. Joomla's mission is to provide a flexible digital publishing platform - it's not to produce the best web site building tool in the world. Basically the idea is that Joomla, the project, was always intended to be more than "just a CMS".
Agreed - sorry if I didn't make this clear enough - but also I'd suggest that Joomla Platform/Frameworks biggest usage will be within the CMS system!
Presumably Joomla 4.0 will be the earliest version that can use the new Joomla Framework - and that will be using all the currently existing classes (and perhaps a few new ones/replacement ones for any deprecated classes that come between now and then).That's not necessarily true. It could be as early as 3.2 BUT there have to be developers interested in starting to port code across to new ways of thinking. And for that to happen, you need solid buy-in from the extension developers. If you don't get that, it's always going to be difficult to innovate the CMS at an architectural level.
So whats the release cycle for the framework going to be like?
That's a really good question. I've mapped out some functional ideas on the issue tracker but that really just catches us up to where we should be now:
https://github.com/joomla/joomla-framework/issues/milestonesWe do need some more planning in terms of a longer term roadmap though. I've been giving that some thought but just getting the transition from platform to framework has been consuming most of my time.
Is it going to be slowly incrementing versions - like the Platform currently is - for example for Joomla CMS 4.0->4.1 how are we going to make sure there aren't too many backward compatibility issues?For a start, the new framework is absolutely backward incompatible with the platform. Namespacing does most of that but we've also taken the opportunity to clean up a lot of crazy stuff in the code (not all, but a lot). For example, I refactored the Application package yesterday to use more dependancy injection and reworked the Database package to use a PSR-3 compliant logger.
For here, we are going to be using semantic versioning for the framework and probably allow each package to control it's own development path. We haven't quite worked out the logistics of how to do that yet but that's the general idea. So what you'll probably see is packages that stay extremely stable over time and other changes that are extremely active.
The problem with our current system is that it's a one-in-all-in deal when using the platform. In the future, the CMS or any other downstream user will be able to lock into the version of the package they actually need.
As I said, I'm still not sure of the fine details but I would probably expect the version 1.0 or the framework to be a way for allowing developers to get used to Composer and just using bits of the framework. I think we can have the expectation that the time between 1.0 and 2.0 is for ironing out further issues and we might do that process quickly (over 6 months say … maybe).
However its 18 months till Jooma 4.0 comes out (all things staying as they are) and in that time I guess theirs a lot of time for big new developments to happen in the Joomla Framework.
One would hope there are :)
So how do we make sure that the Framework at least stays (roughly) on the same path as the CMS.We actually don't. Remember, the framework is a tool that can be used by any PHP developer. Our mission is digital publishing so we are going to be focusing on things that fulfil that mission. So while the framework should be good for building a web site management tool (like the Joomla CMS), it should also be good at writing a web services application that can support not only web sites, but any other device that needs to deal with content.
So I would turn you question around and ask how is the CMS going to stay on a path that allows it to be relevant to a device agnostic world.
Because if Joomla Framework goes in a different direction to the CMS the only thing to link the two things would be a name (Joomla).I think the reality is that the framework is going to be providing technologies that the CMS will need to embrace to stay alive. The code that the CMS runs on is really dated and isn't something that would attract the best and brightest developers (unless they are looking to "fix" it, but then we get back to the question of how quickly are extension developers willing to embrace change).Already with things like JError/Exceptions (Joomla 2.5/3.0), JInput/JRequest (Joomla 2.5/Magic Quotes) we've found places where the Platform team are miles ahead of the CMS team - and the CMS team have had to play catch up with extra statements and stuff that I can imagine the Framework may well accelerate this further!Yes, that's a good example of the tensions that exist between modern developer practice and being stuck with the way the CMS does things that is at least 5 years old. Another way to look at that is to ask what is holding the CMS back and keeping it so far behind. There are at least two ways to look at that problem. But we've tried to attenuate the rate of change for the last two years and we've just got to the point where "playing nice" with the CMS got way too hard.
I guess chiefly my concern is that give it another cycle or two of Joomla versions and we'll find the Framework and CMS at such different stages that the Framework will split up and we'll find ourselves with half the number of developers etc. in that respect.It's a problem because you want to be able to attract talented developers to work in a project like Joomla. But when you have two major areas (three if you count the new Tracker), and the CMS is running on code that is old and outdated, can you blame them for not being overly interested? The other problem is that we have hundreds of active extension developers out there but only a fraction of them are actively engaged in protecting their investment in Joomla. That's a concern as well.
My final question/issue is in what I do in terms of developing extensions. Documentation. Whilst the platform manuals are useful - I've found them to be far from complete - and there has been little on the Joomla Docs! site with the new platform features - so it's actually becoming an issue to code for Joomla 2.5/3.0 extensions in terms of limited documentation.Documentation is a thorn in my and our side. We are playing catch up and you'll see the milestones include items for documentation in all packages. But, I have to fall back to my stock answer : you have as much documentation as people have *bothered* to write. We are enforcing that you write docs now for new work, but it hasn't always been the case - stinks but it is what it is. You know, if every extension developer took just 4 hours out at every PBF, we could have the docs finished in one sprint. It's very frustrating.
How are you guys proposing to build documentation for your system.
There are two levels of documentation. First is the API and that's covered by the DocBlocks. We actually do quite well in this regard and there's another theard on this list where you can see how we are going to do that.
The second level is "tutorial" style and that documentation is in the README.md file in the root of each package.
For example the issue I posted here ( https://github.com/joomla/joomla-platform/pull/1810 ) where JFactory::getUser has changed in some aspects means I now have to use JUser::getInstance for example - which is much well less documented - I can only find a brief summary on the API page.JFactory is not going to be in the new framework and neither is the equivalent of JUser for now.It would be really nice to have full and proper documenation for this stuff again. Rather than a class which I have to trawl through every time - and may not even have what I want in it! I'd be interested to hear your comments on thisI agree. If you have ideas about how we can entice people to write documentation for us, I'm all ears. It's all volunteers driven.
This sounds like massive moan - but I promise its not! I'm just (personally) feel Joomla primarily is about the CMS system (although clearly the standalone Platform/Framework has its advantages) and I'd like to see how you guys feel this is going to fit into the grand scheme of that.They are reasonable concerns but there are also other ways to look at them. I think the CMS has got some thinking to do in terms of what it wants to be and in terms of who is going to make that happen. We (PLT) will be publishing a draft roadmap for the CMS soon and those that can put two-and-two together are going to realise that the CMS is going to have to work with the framework to be able to achieve the results. But that depends on there being people willing to do that … it's a constant problem when dealing with a volunteer workforce where you don't know who is going to show up for work on any given day :)
Regards,Andrew Eddie
Agreed - sorry if I didn't make this clear enough - but also I'd suggest that Joomla Platform/Frameworks biggest usage will be within the CMS system!
http://magazine.joomla.org/issues/issue-mar-2013/item/1136-differences-between-the-joomla-framework-and-joomla-platform says that the platform will be reintegrated with the CMS. So I assumed this was what was going to happen in 3.2/3.5 - now Joomla 3.1 is all but released.
As an extension developer - I'd say I'd be more than happy for this to happen BUT its developing extensions for two versions. Whilst there doesn't need to be backwards compatibility I know - I'm sure you can understand its a lot easier to have a 2.5/3.0 compat extension where you only need to fix bugs once! (I know you guys have a similar thing fixing bugs in the CMS and Platform at the same time!). I find for the majority of my simpler extensions I only have two differences to keep me 2.5.5/3.x compat - a conditional statement for JError and a conditional statement for jQuery inclusion.
Agreed - but as a dev - I couldn't really see what JInput has bought to the table over JRequest other than the nuisance that I have to check for magic quotes before I choose which to use in a extension!!! For example even my website (as a dev) - is on PHP 5.3 - admittedly I'm going to upgrade soon - but so many people will be on earlier versions who just aren't aware. As an extension dev I have to think of backward compatibility for the old PHP versions!
Oh I do completely agree with this. I refer back up to my comments about perhaps introducing this in Joomla 4.x but note again - if the Joomla CMS can't physically keep up with this - then where does it go?? The CMS team has 6 months to produce something then which has a complete new set of (undocumented) API classes.
I know - I've been writing most the Joomla 2.5.x help screens over the last few weeks.
But sometimes I might well be using antique coding practices because so many new classes are being introduced and then dropped just as quickly I struggle to keep up!!!
But in many ways the documentation you guys have is focused in the wrong place for the majority of dev's. I want the most info about JUser etc - stuff used in 90% of extensions - compared to JGitHub - which i can imagine only a handful of people use!!
Yes I noticed about this - however just for example compare this:to the same thing for J!1.5As a noob developer I'd have no clue what a "Global User Object is". But saying to returns the details of the currently logged in user in an array - I could understand! Whilst we want to encourage pro developers to use Joomla! simultaneously we need to encourage new people to Joomla as well - who may not understand optimal coding practices - but who want to learn last.
Yeah I know! I would write it if I knew what kinda stuff I was supposed to use!
I haven't really followed the development of the platform - but just looking at how it appears when I dev'ing stuff - classes change so fast I have no clue what I'm supposed to do. Take JDatabase. Back in 1.5 you literally wrote in the MYSQL statement - then used loadObjectList etc. Awesome simple and effective - requires basic MYSQL syntax - no more. Go to J!2.5 and First version of the platform. We decide to support more databases postgre etc. Great idea. But it took until October last year for ANY documentation to be written in the wiki about how to use it - until then I was using the old 1.5 statements because they worked and I had no idea there was an alternative - until I happened to be researching a component and was looking in the default Joomla component models. Even now theirs nothing about exceptions. I'm no genius with PHP (I do this dev in my time outside my 9-5 job) and their some reasonable docs around on the web about this - but just a few examples on the Joomla Docs site would make life so much easier for me.
Now in Joomla 3.0 we have to use execute() rather than query() - WHY??????? it (to my untrained eye) seems to do the same job and just appears to be hassle. Now you want to drop it all together in the new framework. Then why keep changing it????
This is what annoys me in a way as a dev is that classes are so constantly being created and then dropped almost immediately (I mean I know web dev is constantly being improved with MySQL/PHP/HTML5/CSS3 updates but even so......)!
Another example being JLog - a brilliant class - but has nothing documented about it. I've ended up creating a wiki page for it ( http://docs.joomla.org/Using_JLog ) but I have bugger all clue how accurate it is! It works in J!2.5 and 3.0 but whether it uses the latest and best coding I have no clue.
Completely agreed. And I do sympathise with this. But the CMS (and I think rightly) is focused for 4.x on getting a restful API doc ready so mobile apps etc can be tapped in. Again the CMS team has 6 months to work on this and component etc updates. And their constantly behind - e.g. its taken them this long to get Layouts implemented - its still mainly mootools rather than jQuery orientated in the backend. I think the PLT needs to look at a longer gap at getting the new x.0 releases supported by the CMS team - perhaps 12 months to that first 4.0/5.0 etc release - because currently going from 3.0->3.1->3.2 is almost like Beta versions for Joomla 3.5 as their just bringing them upto where Joomla 3.0 should have been to start with!!
I think most dev's are prepared for new JModel/JView/JController Classes coming - so this is your time to introduce sweeping changes if they are needed. But please release them in block rather than a kinda seepage in we seem to be having at the moment - it actually makes it easier because then you can make the sweeping changes in one go - rather than constantly worrying about class changes every time Joomla gets updated (yes there will have to be changes I appreciate - but nothing too significant I would hope!)
On 12 March 2013 12:14, George Wilson <georgeja...@googlemail.com> wrote:
Agreed - sorry if I didn't make this clear enough - but also I'd suggest that Joomla Platform/Frameworks biggest usage will be within the CMS system!Right, but it's a bit of a circular line of thought. We have to make the Platform work for the CMS so we can't do anything to the Platform which doesn't work for the CMS. You end up chasing your tail. The Framework, though, is actually starting from scratch - in terms of that actual code, anyone can become the biggest stakeholder.
http://magazine.joomla.org/issues/issue-mar-2013/item/1136-differences-between-the-joomla-framework-and-joomla-platform says that the platform will be reintegrated with the CMS. So I assumed this was what was going to happen in 3.2/3.5 - now Joomla 3.1 is all but released.It's missed 3.1 - just the way it's going to happen.
As an extension developer - I'd say I'd be more than happy for this to happen BUT its developing extensions for two versions. Whilst there doesn't need to be backwards compatibility I know - I'm sure you can understand its a lot easier to have a 2.5/3.0 compat extension where you only need to fix bugs once! (I know you guys have a similar thing fixing bugs in the CMS and Platform at the same time!). I find for the majority of my simpler extensions I only have two differences to keep me 2.5.5/3.x compat - a conditional statement for JError and a conditional statement for jQuery inclusion.
I think the ideal is for the extension developers (and I do still *just* fit into that category) to say enough is enough and we need a more reliable layer that can span Joomla versions. It may be too late for 2.5 but looking forward it would be idea for extensions to be run on a layer that is available in both 3.x and 4.x.
Agreed - but as a dev - I couldn't really see what JInput has bought to the table over JRequest other than the nuisance that I have to check for magic quotes before I choose which to use in a extension!!! For example even my website (as a dev) - is on PHP 5.3 - admittedly I'm going to upgrade soon - but so many people will be on earlier versions who just aren't aware. As an extension dev I have to think of backward compatibility for the old PHP versions!The change was architectural. JInput allows for dependancy injection (best practice) whereas JRequest was a glorified globals container (hard to test, dev's doing naughty things with it, etc).Oh I do completely agree with this. I refer back up to my comments about perhaps introducing this in Joomla 4.x but note again - if the Joomla CMS can't physically keep up with this - then where does it go?? The CMS team has 6 months to produce something then which has a complete new set of (undocumented) API classes.It's 12 months until 3.5 and 18 months until 4.0 if I have my dates right. Should be enough time to sort something out.
But sometimes I might well be using antique coding practices because so many new classes are being introduced and then dropped just as quickly I struggle to keep up!!!It actually hasn't been that quick when you follow the history, but it does feel quick.
But in many ways the documentation you guys have is focused in the wrong place for the majority of dev's. I want the most info about JUser etc - stuff used in 90% of extensions - compared to JGitHub - which i can imagine only a handful of people use!!JUser comes from the 1.5 days when developers wanted to develop and didn't want to be slowed down by having to write documentation. JGithub is a product of our "new rules" :) Again, what's there is what's been contributed and we have a lot of technical debt owed to us.
One is an API reference and there's a recognised style for that. The other is a tutorial and that's a different beast. Both are very necessary though and "lately" we've required more of contributors in terms of tutorials.
Yeah I know! I would write it if I knew what kinda stuff I was supposed to use!I think the clue here is to know where to write it when you find out. Ideally, everyone can do the following when they find a "gotcha nugget":1. Add a short note in the API documentation (probably to do with a class method).2. Add a longer note and an example to our new README.md files at the root of each package.
This is what annoys me in a way as a dev is that classes are so constantly being created and then dropped almost immediately (I mean I know web dev is constantly being improved with MySQL/PHP/HTML5/CSS3 updates but even so......)!
You'll have to refresh my memory. I can't recall any classes added and immediately dropped. There is always a lead time before the code is actually removed from the code.
Another example being JLog - a brilliant class - but has nothing documented about it. I've ended up creating a wiki page for it ( http://docs.joomla.org/Using_JLog ) but I have bugger all clue how accurate it is! It works in J!2.5 and 3.0 but whether it uses the latest and best coding I have no clue.
Completely agreed. And I do sympathise with this. But the CMS (and I think rightly) is focused for 4.x on getting a restful API doc ready so mobile apps etc can be tapped in. Again the CMS team has 6 months to work on this and component etc updates. And their constantly behind - e.g. its taken them this long to get Layouts implemented - its still mainly mootools rather than jQuery orientated in the backend. I think the PLT needs to look at a longer gap at getting the new x.0 releases supported by the CMS team - perhaps 12 months to that first 4.0/5.0 etc release - because currently going from 3.0->3.1->3.2 is almost like Beta versions for Joomla 3.5 as their just bringing them upto where Joomla 3.0 should have been to start with!!I think you've got your dates wrong. It's now 2 years between major releases.
I think most dev's are prepared for new JModel/JView/JController Classes coming - so this is your time to introduce sweeping changes if they are needed. But please release them in block rather than a kinda seepage in we seem to be having at the moment - it actually makes it easier because then you can make the sweeping changes in one go - rather than constantly worrying about class changes every time Joomla gets updated (yes there will have to be changes I appreciate - but nothing too significant I would hope!)What I think needs to happen is for the extension developers to get together and thrash out what they want, when they want it, how fast it should roll out, etc. The PLT can certainly facilitate that conversation, but the ownership of any decisions and forward momentum, in my opinion, needs to come squarely from the extension developers themselves. Where the Framework would fit into a timeline for that to happen, I have no clue. I certainly know what I'd be doing if I was still in big-extension territory, and I'm happy to share those ideas and how the Framework fits in, but I think those ideas would be a bit too radical for most to swallow :)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! Platform Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-plat...@googlegroups.com.
If I was being cynical I'd say stakeholders like ebay and ebay and ebay? (as they contribute a fair amount to the development of the Platform and presumably will to the Framework).
If you don't put your ideas out there then a compromise can't be found :P There's always going be ideas on both sides of the spectrum - but we can't find a compromise in the middle unless we hear both ends of it. Again I think this talk needs to come now. Pull the big extensions (Phoca, Akeeba, Kunena, CB, JomSocial to name a few major ones) together - but we also need to look at the other end. We need to make sure this stuff will be understandable to a new programmer coming up - its not point, bluntly, having the old farts using Joomla - we need to encourage new programmers to use Joomla! as well.
On Tuesday, March 12, 2013 2:57:52 AM UTC, Andrew Eddie wrote:On 12 March 2013 12:14, George Wilson <georgeja...@googlemail.com> wrote:
Agreed - sorry if I didn't make this clear enough - but also I'd suggest that Joomla Platform/Frameworks biggest usage will be within the CMS system!Right, but it's a bit of a circular line of thought. We have to make the Platform work for the CMS so we can't do anything to the Platform which doesn't work for the CMS. You end up chasing your tail. The Framework, though, is actually starting from scratch - in terms of that actual code, anyone can become the biggest stakeholder.If I was being cynical I'd say stakeholders like ebay and ebay and ebay? (as they contribute a fair amount to the development of the Platform and presumably will to the Framework).
On 12 March 2013 12:14, George Wilson <georgeja...@googlemail.com> wrote:Agreed - but as a dev - I couldn't really see what JInput has bought to the table over JRequest other than the nuisance that I have to check for magic quotes before I choose which to use in a extension!!! For example even my website (as a dev) - is on PHP 5.3 - admittedly I'm going to upgrade soon - but so many people will be on earlier versions who just aren't aware. As an extension dev I have to think of backward compatibility for the old PHP versions!The change was architectural. JInput allows for dependancy injection (best practice) whereas JRequest was a glorified globals container (hard to test, dev's doing naughty things with it, etc).
Hi George,
Joomla 3.1 is a one-click upgrade from Joomla 3.0 with backward
compatibility, so hardly anyone should/will stay on 3.0.
Also, according to Joomla's development strategy
(http://developer.joomla.org/strategy.html), big breaks in compatibility
can't occur until major versions (e.g. 4.0) so it's not really up for
debate as to whether something should be kept in or not. It definitely
should according to the development strategy.
Joomla 3.0 is not a beta version and it is very useable. It's a stable
release and intended for new sites. The proof is in the pudding :)
On Monday, March 11, 2013 9:57:52 PM UTC-5, Andrew Eddie wrote:On 12 March 2013 12:14, George Wilson <georgeja...@googlemail.com> wrote:Agreed - but as a dev - I couldn't really see what JInput has bought to the table over JRequest other than the nuisance that I have to check for magic quotes before I choose which to use in a extension!!! For example even my website (as a dev) - is on PHP 5.3 - admittedly I'm going to upgrade soon - but so many people will be on earlier versions who just aren't aware. As an extension dev I have to think of backward compatibility for the old PHP versions!The change was architectural. JInput allows for dependancy injection (best practice) whereas JRequest was a glorified globals container (hard to test, dev's doing naughty things with it, etc).
George - not sure if you understood the implications of Andrew's point? You asked the question, he answered, but then, the discussion took a non-productive turn.
There is a lot in his short comment that you could use to understand if that's your goal, and I do believe it is your goal. Start by reviewing "dependency injection" and "static" classes. What does he mean when he says "glorified globals container?" How is it hard to test? Why does that matter? What "naughty things" can developers do with JRequest that Andrew seems to be suggesting can't be done with JInput?
Did you notice how the class name was changed, too? Is that good or bad? And, how so?
That kind of analysis will lead to learning that helps you as a developer.
I'm serious - I'd like to see your response to Andrew's answer to your question. Is that change the type of improvement beneficial to this community? Are there better ways to introduce the change, assuming you agree with the reasoning.
We could use critical thinking in this community. Takes more time but in the end you'll benefit from that approach, I promise.
One of my concern, will new framework (which likely writing from scratch) will using entirely new approach to build things (design pattern, mvc, etc)?
I believe the one that been planed will give more robust feature... Will this make devs write codes shorter and quickers ?
If this will be entirely new... Is it the same as if you stop current joomla development (perhaps up to 3.1) and you build entirely new framework and by coincidence you re-brand it as joomla again since all main devs is the same devs that build joomla (up to 3.1) and the devs will offer the migration between 'old' joomla to 'new' joomla ?
I guess this is where the root of a lot of disagreement occurs.... VISION
Like me, and probably lot of other 3rd devs in Joomla is they don't get the VISION from the core devs. Up till now, i'm thinking that the main objective of joomla is to deliver the best experience and flexibility to build CMS based website, and the Platform is born to 'attract' more dev that has no experience in the CMS to build the solution in 'the CMS way'.
This is why many dev comparing development in joomla with wordpress, coz in build 'extension' in wordpress is quicker and easier , especially when devs using custom post type (eventhough the scalable and standard is pretty bit awful).... but now i see wordpress and joomla have very different vision.
This is also reason why by default joomla don't have built-in CCK/Custom field, so some of my 'old joomla' friend now moving to cms like processwire ... because it has build-in custom field to build website easier.. but this is just because it has different vision from joomla.
In the future, i'm seeing Joomla as a system with tons of flexibility (cms, stand alone, web services, mobile apps. you name it...) with recent technology and best practices (through new design pattern, dependency injection..). One of the big cons is joomla will have lesser community as i believe a lot of devs doesn't require that advanced concept as they simply making money by create company profile/catalog/portfolio website for their client.
Brand positioning is very important and i think there will be shifting in the future...
if you take a look at our 'marketing ads' here http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Qjnc0H8utks#!
we brand joomla as one of the most world popular CMS platform, while i see in this discussion, you don't wanna people have mindset to see joomla as CMS alone...
So taking that thought further, it would seem obvious to consider using the Framework for this "new thing", this new layer that extension developers should come to rely on. Yes, the code itself will be new, and you'll have a lot of rewriting to do, but the prize at the end of doing that, IF the extension developers work together on this, will be worth it. If you make it so this layer allows your extension to work in the Joomla CMS, or in a web services layer also without changing a single line of code, then that will be an amazing feature of engineering. Joomla becomes known not only for a way to builds web site, but it becomes a name synonymous with being the best way to deliver content to any type of device or client.
If we can achieve that in the next three years, that will be pretty darn cool :)
This is just the first step. Not much is going to change tomorrow or the next day or even in Joomla 3.1. It's business as usual. But by the middle of the year, we'll have a good code base with many issues ironed out and we can start talking about what's next for the Joomla project as a whole.
Hopefully that helps paint one version of the big picture that I think is possible :)
Regards,
Andrew Eddie
--
I guess this is where the root of a lot of disagreement occurs.... VISION
Like me, and probably lot of other 3rd devs in Joomla is they don't get the VISION from the core devs.
Up till now, i'm thinking that the main objective of joomla is to deliver the best experience and flexibility to build CMS based website, and the Platform is born to 'attract' more dev that has no experience in the CMS to build the solution in 'the CMS way'.
This is why many dev comparing development in joomla with wordpress, coz in build 'extension' in wordpress is quicker and easier , especially when devs using custom post type (eventhough the scalable and standard is pretty bit awful).... but now i see wordpress and joomla have very different vision.
This is also reason why by default joomla don't have built-in CCK/Custom field, so some of my 'old joomla' friend now moving to cms like processwire ... because it has build-in custom field to build website easier.. but this is just because it has different vision from joomla.
In the future, i'm seeing Joomla as a system with tons of flexibility (cms, stand alone, web services, mobile apps. you name it...) with recent technology and best practices (through new design pattern, dependency injection..). One of the big cons is joomla will have lesser community as i believe a lot of devs doesn't require that advanced concept as they simply making money by create company profile/catalog/portfolio website for their client.
we brand joomla as one of the most world popular CMS platform, while i see in this discussion, you don't wanna people have mindset to see joomla as CMS alone...
On 13 March 2013 14:55, Viktor Iwan <vic...@doxadigital.com> wrote:
Up till now, i'm thinking that the main objective of joomla is to deliver the best experience and flexibility to build CMS based website, and the Platform is born to 'attract' more dev that has no experience in the CMS to build the solution in 'the CMS way'.
I would imagine many people would agree with you, but it's actually not the mission as stated by the project. The mission is not to "exclusively" build the best CMS in the world. That can be an outcome but we should not be giving those developers a hard time about wanting to do more with the Joomla code. If that's the case, then we should be telling Michael to stop work on the new Joomla issue tracker because it's not a CMS. I will certainly need to go look for a new project to contribute to :)
This is also reason why by default joomla don't have built-in CCK/Custom field, so some of my 'old joomla' friend now moving to cms like processwire ... because it has build-in custom field to build website easier.. but this is just because it has different vision from joomla.
We don't have a built in CCK because nobody has ever contributed one.
In the future, i'm seeing Joomla as a system with tons of flexibility (cms, stand alone, web services, mobile apps. you name it...) with recent technology and best practices (through new design pattern, dependency injection..). One of the big cons is joomla will have lesser community as i believe a lot of devs doesn't require that advanced concept as they simply making money by create company profile/catalog/portfolio website for their client.
One of the great things about Mambo is it made complex things seem easy. I think we've gone off-track in recent years. Access control is one example where a few people asked for it and it made things infinitely more complex (I did warn everyone that would be the case). Does that mean things can't change? Of course not, but I believe part of the solution is for users and extension developers to work together more than they are now.
we brand joomla as one of the most world popular CMS platform, while i see in this discussion, you don't wanna people have mindset to see joomla as CMS alone...
Sure, but there seems to be this mindset that the Joomla developer community can only work on one thing - the CMS and the Platform/Framework is like some cancer that needs to be lanced to get us back on the one true path. Nobody here is stopping anyone from improving the CMS. The existence of the Platform or the Framework or whatever we call it is not stopping people from making pull requests against the CMS. It's up to you guys that are investing in the CMS to protect your investment. The CMS is lacking a strong developer pool at the moment - it's time for some new people to step up and fill that gap and cast their own visions for what the CMS could become. We on the Framework will be around when you find you need better code to make it all happen :)
We don't have a built in CCK because nobody has ever contributed one.But what I've found hard to find is what DOES Joomla want??
Elin said the other day on the CMS group that "Who knows what code there will be contributed to the CMS in the next 3 months and what people will do with it or what will come after that.
I think what she says there is important - in that Joomla (CMS anyhow) seems to have lost track of a direction. In terms of new features you submit something and more than a couple of people want it it will be included. I'm seems from the CMS group for example that there are 2/3 teams all working on a UCM model for Joomla - 1 for framework perhaps 2 on the CMS team - and whoever finishes first gets it put in - without looking at what everyone else is doing and pooling all the resources together!
The good thing about the core devs before was that it meant Joomla had a definite path.
I haven't been to the conferences - and I know that a lot of things do get discussed there. But sometimes you feel that Joomla CMS decides on something when the github pull comes through - not saying to a group of people - this is what we want - go off research it and come back with a base layer of code that we can work on. I'm sure if we sent off a volunteer group of devs to build a CCK editor it could be done before 3.5 comes out! Instead we're sitting around saying well perhaps a UCM model etc.
I don't disagree that the Platform/Framework is important to Joomla! But only if the two groups work together - if they are not working together - there seems little point in having the Platform/Framework and just spinning it off as its own thing (as most people know Joomla for the CMS not the Platform/Framework).
The reason I got into Joomla in the first place was it made making stuff simple. Making a database query was easy in 4 lines your could retrieve give or take anything you want from the database:$db=JFactory::DBO();$query="SOME MYSQL QUERY";$db->setQuery($query)$row=$db->loadRow()If I wanted to get the details of a user:$user= JFactory::getUser()
Now I've got to dig through the JUser class (or its replacement) to find details on a user.
Start grabbing the database from a load of injections and sifting through (a potentially new) JDatabase class. Now it seems less so and I feel at the expense of bringing in complex coders we're alienating your average Joe from being able to make a simple extension to finish a website they might be creating or even getting into Joomla! in the first place. One of the best things with Joomla 1.5/2.5/3.x is that it is so simple to be able to jump on-ship and I fear the direction of framework is going to mean we will loose this at some point in the not too distant future!
Just on a side note out of interest when you said you were using "PSR-3 logger rather than calling the static JLog methods" does that mean we'll be deprecating JLog in the near('ish) future??
From: joomla-de...@googlegroups.com [mailto:joomla-de...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Eddie
I actually can't find WordPress's published vision or mission but I suspect WP would revolve around making a really cool website for publishing content. That's quite different from Joomla's mission.
[>>] Yes, i fully understand now that joomla by its vision never tried to 'compete' with wordpress or drupal in term of content publishing.. this is where many dev mislead right now...
We don't have a built in CCK because nobody has ever contributed one.
[>>] There are people from france, octopoos team, who did a very great job to "extend" joomla with CCK with component named SEBLOD, they are my time saver as they build great gui for custom field to make drag 'n drop system for authoring when build sites, it using #__content.... Well, to be honest, i'm bit concern about the component existence in future for two reason : need to recompile/recode and the CMS part is lack of support since all the geniuses is working on the framework right now
One of the great things about Mambo is it made complex things seem easy. I think we've gone off-track in recent years. Access control is one example where a few people asked for it and it made things infinitely more complex (I did warn everyone that would be the case). Does that mean things can't change? Of course not, but I believe part of the solution is for users and extension developers to work together more than they are now.
[>>] I believe what you preparing here is what it required in the future, i begin to receive calls from prospect where they need to port their site with web service rather than php-mysql db calling , or convert site into mobile apps... this is where the CMS can't answer those needs... but again this "status quo" vs innovation is more like "comfort zone" vs innovation...
The CMS is lacking a strong developer pool at the moment - it's time for some new people to step up and fill that gap and cast their own visions for what the CMS could become. We on the Framework will be around when you find you need better code to make it all happen :)[>>]
[>>] Ahh bad news... the challenge to create Rich, Powerful, Flexible and Robust CMS/Publishing content... doesn't look sexy anymore for majority here.. :) ... i still dream there will be front-end editing, include drag 'n drop layout structuring, etc.. something that will make end user drop their jaws and i will simply said it with my coolest voice tone "well, it's joomla".. kaching !... ha ha ha... wish i can contribute in CMS sooner or letter, but consider me as the beginner/"user" developer... i tried to see the CMS source code, and its all beyond my mind...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Joomla! Platform Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/joomla-dev-platform/4Q0eu4G7NWI/unsubscribe?hl=en.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to joomla-dev-plat...@googlegroups.com.