Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
24 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

EvanDotPro
Hi all,

I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?

---
Evan Coury, ZCE
http://blog.evan.pro/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

HHGAG
Hi,

I think BC breaks till RC are ok. But don't ask me which one should be preferred ^^


Hasan H. Gürsoy (HHGAG)

Evan Coury <[hidden email]> schrieb:

>Hi all,
>
>I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
>recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
>be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
>getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
>like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
>not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
>curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>
>---
>Evan Coury, ZCE
>http://blog.evan.pro/
Hasan H. Gürsoy (HHGAG)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

Sascha-Oliver Prolic
In reply to this post by EvanDotPro
2012/7/13 Evan Coury <[hidden email]>:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
> recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
> be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
> getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
> like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
> not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
> curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>
> ---
> Evan Coury, ZCE
> http://blog.evan.pro/

I would prefere 'Configuration' over config, because I don't see any
reason to shortname to 'Config'. BC break should be okay for RC1.

Best Regards

Sascha

--
Sascha-Oliver Prolic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

weierophinney
Administrator
In reply to this post by EvanDotPro
-- Evan Coury <[hidden email]> wrote
(on Friday, 13 July 2012, 08:14 AM -0700):
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
> recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
> be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
> getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
> like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
> not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
> curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?

Consistency is a goal for ZF2, so let's standardize. I find
"Configuration" a bit too verbose, personally, and vote for "Config".

--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
Project Lead            | [hidden email]
Zend Framework          | http://framework.zend.com/
PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

Jurian Sluiman
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

Matus Zeman
In reply to this post by Sascha-Oliver Prolic
I'm for Config - it's descriptive enough I think.
but --- we should agree on this globally across whole ZF2. E.g. now we get application config from SM using 'Configuration' ... so I think these cases should be renamed also.

Matus

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Sascha-Oliver Prolic <[hidden email]> wrote:
2012/7/13 Evan Coury <[hidden email]>:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
> recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
> be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
> getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
> like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
> not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
> curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>
> ---
> Evan Coury, ZCE
> http://blog.evan.pro/

I would prefere 'Configuration' over config, because I don't see any
reason to shortname to 'Config'. BC break should be okay for RC1.

Best Regards

Sascha

--
Sascha-Oliver Prolic

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

Marco Pivetta
I'm for Configuration. We should get the idea of abbreviations discouraged by encouraging usage of complete words :)

Marco Pivetta

http://twitter.com/Ocramius     

http://marco-pivetta.com    



On 13 July 2012 17:34, Matus Zeman <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm for Config - it's descriptive enough I think.
but --- we should agree on this globally across whole ZF2. E.g. now we get application config from SM using 'Configuration' ... so I think these cases should be renamed also.

Matus


On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Sascha-Oliver Prolic <[hidden email]> wrote:
2012/7/13 Evan Coury <[hidden email]>:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
> recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
> be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
> getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
> like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
> not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
> curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>
> ---
> Evan Coury, ZCE
> http://blog.evan.pro/

I would prefere 'Configuration' over config, because I don't see any
reason to shortname to 'Config'. BC break should be okay for RC1.

Best Regards

Sascha

--
Sascha-Oliver Prolic


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

Artur Bodera
I'm for "config".

That's because:

1) We have Zend\Config
2) We use *.config* files
3) Config is shorter yet is as recognizable and well established in IT as "Configuration".
4) Plural for the longer form is "Configurations" which is a mouthful.
5) "Config" is such a common abbreviation that many young people can't even resolve it to "configuration" :P

--
      __
     /.)\   +48 695 600 936
     \(./   [hidden email]



On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 8:24 PM, Marco Pivetta <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm for Configuration. We should get the idea of abbreviations discouraged by encouraging usage of complete words :)

Marco Pivetta

http://twitter.com/Ocramius     

http://marco-pivetta.com    



On 13 July 2012 17:34, Matus Zeman <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm for Config - it's descriptive enough I think.
but --- we should agree on this globally across whole ZF2. E.g. now we get application config from SM using 'Configuration' ... so I think these cases should be renamed also.

Matus


On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Sascha-Oliver Prolic <[hidden email]> wrote:
2012/7/13 Evan Coury <[hidden email]>:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
> recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
> be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
> getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
> like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
> not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
> curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>
> ---
> Evan Coury, ZCE
> http://blog.evan.pro/

I would prefere 'Configuration' over config, because I don't see any
reason to shortname to 'Config'. BC break should be okay for RC1.

Best Regards

Sascha

--
Sascha-Oliver Prolic



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

jeremiah
This post has NOT been accepted by the mailing list yet.
In reply to this post by Marco Pivetta
config is the name of the default project config directory, and part of the autoloader file names.

I agree it should be consistent and I assume it should extend to directory and file names.

I'm for config and Config (as case convention dictates)

Jeremiah

On Jul 13, 2012, at 11:25 AM, Marco Pivetta [via Zend Framework Community] wrote:

I'm for Configuration. We should get the idea of abbreviations discouraged by encouraging usage of complete words :)

Marco Pivetta

http://twitter.com/Ocramius     

http://marco-pivetta.com    



On 13 July 2012 17:34, Matus Zeman <<a href="x-msg://5237/user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&amp;node=4655753&amp;i=0" target="_top" rel="nofollow" link="external">[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm for Config - it's descriptive enough I think.
but --- we should agree on this globally across whole ZF2. E.g. now we get application config from SM using 'Configuration' ... so I think these cases should be renamed also.

Matus


On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Sascha-Oliver Prolic <<a href="x-msg://5237/user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&amp;node=4655753&amp;i=1" target="_top" rel="nofollow" link="external">[hidden email]> wrote:
2012/7/13 Evan Coury <<a href="x-msg://5237/user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&amp;node=4655753&amp;i=2" target="_top" rel="nofollow" link="external">[hidden email]>:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
> recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
> be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
> getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
> like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
> not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
> curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>
> ---
> Evan Coury, ZCE
> http://blog.evan.pro/

I would prefere 'Configuration' over config, because I don't see any
reason to shortname to 'Config'. BC break should be okay for RC1.

Best Regards

Sascha

--
Sascha-Oliver Prolic





If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://zend-framework-community.634137.n4.nabble.com/Getting-ready-for-RC1-Consistency-in-Module-php-tp4655737p4655753.html
To start a new topic under ZF Contributor, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from ZF Contributor, click here.
NAML

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

netiul
In reply to this post by Artur Bodera

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Artur Bodera <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm for "config".

That's because:

1) We have Zend\Config
2) We use *.config* files
3) Config is shorter yet is as recognizable and well established in IT as "Configuration".
4) Plural for the longer form is "Configurations" which is a mouthful.
5) "Config" is such a common abbreviation that many young people can't even resolve it to "configuration" :P

+1
 
--
      __
     /.)\   <a href="tel:%2B48%20695%20600%20936" value="+48695600936" target="_blank">+48 695 600 936
     \(./   [hidden email]



On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 8:24 PM, Marco Pivetta <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm for Configuration. We should get the idea of abbreviations discouraged by encouraging usage of complete words :)

Marco Pivetta

http://twitter.com/Ocramius     

http://marco-pivetta.com    



On 13 July 2012 17:34, Matus Zeman <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm for Config - it's descriptive enough I think.
but --- we should agree on this globally across whole ZF2. E.g. now we get application config from SM using 'Configuration' ... so I think these cases should be renamed also.

Matus


On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Sascha-Oliver Prolic <[hidden email]> wrote:
2012/7/13 Evan Coury <[hidden email]>:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
> recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
> be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
> getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
> like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
> not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
> curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>
> ---
> Evan Coury, ZCE
> http://blog.evan.pro/

I would prefere 'Configuration' over config, because I don't see any
reason to shortname to 'Config'. BC break should be okay for RC1.

Best Regards

Sascha

--
Sascha-Oliver Prolic




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

Anthony Shireman
In reply to this post by Marco Pivetta
While more verbose I'm for 'Configuration' since we use other full words rather than shortened (Application instead of 'App', Service instead of 'Svc', etc...)

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Marco Pivetta <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm for Configuration. We should get the idea of abbreviations discouraged by encouraging usage of complete words :)

Marco Pivetta

http://twitter.com/Ocramius     

http://marco-pivetta.com    



On 13 July 2012 17:34, Matus Zeman <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm for Config - it's descriptive enough I think.
but --- we should agree on this globally across whole ZF2. E.g. now we get application config from SM using 'Configuration' ... so I think these cases should be renamed also.

Matus


On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Sascha-Oliver Prolic <[hidden email]> wrote:
2012/7/13 Evan Coury <[hidden email]>:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
> recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
> be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
> getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
> like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
> not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
> curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>
> ---
> Evan Coury, ZCE
> http://blog.evan.pro/

I would prefere 'Configuration' over config, because I don't see any
reason to shortname to 'Config'. BC break should be okay for RC1.

Best Regards

Sascha

--
Sascha-Oliver Prolic



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

akrabat
In reply to this post by weierophinney

On 13 Jul 2012, at 16:31, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:

> -- Evan Coury <[hidden email]> wrote
> (on Friday, 13 July 2012, 08:14 AM -0700):
>> I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
>> recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
>> be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
>> getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
>> like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
>> not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
>> curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>
> Consistency is a goal for ZF2, so let's standardize. I find
> "Configuration" a bit too verbose, personally, and vote for "Config".

Config is my preferred choice too.


Regards,

Rob...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

aboozar
In reply to this post by weierophinney
Hi,
I agree with
Evan to using `Config` or `Configuration` overall not both of them,
on the other hand I`m agree with
dear Matthew and I vote for `Config` too.

Regards
Aboozar Ghafari




On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 8:01 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney <[hidden email]> wrote:
-- Evan Coury <[hidden email]> wrote
(on Friday, 13 July 2012, 08:14 AM -0700):
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
> recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
> be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
> getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
> like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
> not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
> curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?

Consistency is a goal for ZF2, so let's standardize. I find
"Configuration" a bit too verbose, personally, and vote for "Config".

--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
Project Lead            | [hidden email]
Zend Framework          | http://framework.zend.com/
PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

DeNix
In reply to this post by EvanDotPro
Btw, there are also:

Zend\Session\Configuration
Zend\Form\View\HelperConfiguration
Zend\I18n\View\HelperConfiguration
Zend\Navigation\View\HelperConfiguration

13.07.2012 19:14, Evan Coury пишет:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
> recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
> be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
> getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
> like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
> not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
> curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>
> ---
> Evan Coury, ZCE
> http://blog.evan.pro/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

weierophinney
Administrator
-- Denis Portnov <[hidden email]> wrote
(on Friday, 13 July 2012, 11:15 PM +0400):
> Btw, there are also:
>
> Zend\Session\Configuration
> Zend\Form\View\HelperConfiguration
> Zend\I18n\View\HelperConfiguration
> Zend\Navigation\View\HelperConfiguration

Yes -- if we change it in one place, we really should make it consistent
everywhere.

> 13.07.2012 19:14, Evan Coury пишет:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
> >recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
> >be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
> >getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
> >like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
> >not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
> >curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
> >
> >---
> >Evan Coury, ZCE
> >http://blog.evan.pro/
>
>

--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
Project Lead            | [hidden email]
Zend Framework          | http://framework.zend.com/
PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

Adolfo Abegg
In reply to this post by Matus Zeman

+1 for standardization, +1 for Configuration over Config  :-)

best,
Adolfo



On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Matus Zeman <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm for Config - it's descriptive enough I think.
but --- we should agree on this globally across whole ZF2. E.g. now we get application config from SM using 'Configuration' ... so I think these cases should be renamed also.

Matus


On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Sascha-Oliver Prolic <[hidden email]> wrote:
2012/7/13 Evan Coury <[hidden email]>:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
> recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
> be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
> getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
> like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
> not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
> curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>
> ---
> Evan Coury, ZCE
> http://blog.evan.pro/

I would prefere 'Configuration' over config, because I don't see any
reason to shortname to 'Config'. BC break should be okay for RC1.

Best Regards

Sascha

--
Sascha-Oliver Prolic


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

Dolf Schimmel
1. ZF is used by developers
2. Developers are lazy
3. Having to type 'Configuration' is for those who are not lazy
4. We abbreviate i18n and l10n with a reason
5. config is a well respected shorted version for configuration.

conclusion: 'Config' is the one and only logical choice =)

Dolf

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Adolfo Abegg <[hidden email]> wrote:

+1 for standardization, +1 for Configuration over Config  :-)

best,
Adolfo



On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Matus Zeman <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm for Config - it's descriptive enough I think.
but --- we should agree on this globally across whole ZF2. E.g. now we get application config from SM using 'Configuration' ... so I think these cases should be renamed also.

Matus


On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Sascha-Oliver Prolic <[hidden email]> wrote:
2012/7/13 Evan Coury <[hidden email]>:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
> recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
> be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
> getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
> like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
> not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
> curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>
> ---
> Evan Coury, ZCE
> http://blog.evan.pro/

I would prefere 'Configuration' over config, because I don't see any
reason to shortname to 'Config'. BC break should be okay for RC1.

Best Regards

Sascha

--
Sascha-Oliver Prolic



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

Marco Pivetta
Thinkscape has quite a point with all the other `config`s around the library/skeleton. I didn't think of it... If it is allowed, please consider me as a +1 for `Config` since the bc break has minor impact.
Marco Pivetta

http://twitter.com/Ocramius     

http://marco-pivetta.com    



On 13 July 2012 23:14, Dolf Schimmel <[hidden email]> wrote:
1. ZF is used by developers
2. Developers are lazy
3. Having to type 'Configuration' is for those who are not lazy
4. We abbreviate i18n and l10n with a reason
5. config is a well respected shorted version for configuration.

conclusion: 'Config' is the one and only logical choice =)

Dolf

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Adolfo Abegg <[hidden email]> wrote:

+1 for standardization, +1 for Configuration over Config  :-)

best,
Adolfo



On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Matus Zeman <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm for Config - it's descriptive enough I think.
but --- we should agree on this globally across whole ZF2. E.g. now we get application config from SM using 'Configuration' ... so I think these cases should be renamed also.

Matus


On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Sascha-Oliver Prolic <[hidden email]> wrote:
2012/7/13 Evan Coury <[hidden email]>:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but the
> recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over time to
> be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
> getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration(). I'd
> like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or 'Configuration'. We're
> not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but I'm
> curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>
> ---
> Evan Coury, ZCE
> http://blog.evan.pro/

I would prefere 'Configuration' over config, because I don't see any
reason to shortname to 'Config'. BC break should be okay for RC1.

Best Regards

Sascha

--
Sascha-Oliver Prolic




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

weierophinney
Administrator
I'm calling it, as we need a decision.

Evan -- "Config" is it.

However, it needs to be applied across the framework.

I look forward to your PR. :)

-- Marco Pivetta <[hidden email]> wrote
(on Friday, 13 July 2012, 11:24 PM +0200):

> Thinkscape has quite a point with all the other `config`s around the library/
> skeleton. I didn't think of it... If it is allowed, please consider me as a +1
> for `Config` since the bc break has minor impact.
> Marco Pivetta
>
> http://twitter.com/Ocramius     
>
> http://marco-pivetta.com   
>
>
>
> On 13 July 2012 23:14, Dolf Schimmel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>     1. ZF is used by developers
>     2. Developers are lazy
>     3. Having to type 'Configuration' is for those who are not lazy
>     4. We abbreviate i18n and l10n with a reason
>     5. config is a well respected shorted version for configuration.
>
>     conclusion: 'Config' is the one and only logical choice =)
>    
>     Dolf
>    
>     On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Adolfo Abegg <[hidden email]>
>     wrote:
>
>
>         +1 for standardization, +1 for Configuration over Config  :-)
>
>         best,
>         Adolfo
>
>
>
>         On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Matus Zeman <[hidden email]>
>         wrote:
>
>             I'm for Config - it's descriptive enough I think.
>             but --- we should agree on this globally across whole ZF2. E.g. now
>             we get application config from SM using 'Configuration' ... so I
>             think these cases should be renamed also.
>            
>             Matus
>
>
>             On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Sascha-Oliver Prolic <
>             [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>                 2012/7/13 Evan Coury <[hidden email]>:
>                 > Hi all,
>                 >
>                 > I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but
>                 the
>                 > recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over
>                 time to
>                 > be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
>                 > getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration
>                 (). I'd
>                 > like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or
>                 'Configuration'. We're
>                 > not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but
>                 I'm
>                 > curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>                 >
>                 > ---
>                 > Evan Coury, ZCE
>                 > http://blog.evan.pro/
>
>                 I would prefere 'Configuration' over config, because I don't
>                 see any
>                 reason to shortname to 'Config'. BC break should be okay for
>                 RC1.
>
>                 Best Regards
>                
>                 Sascha
>
>                 --
>                 Sascha-Oliver Prolic
>            
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
Project Lead            | [hidden email]
Zend Framework          | http://framework.zend.com/
PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Getting ready for RC1: Consistency in Module.php

EvanDotPro
I'll handle this for the ModuleManager stuff -- Can I get volunteers
for the other classes in the framework please? :)

---
Evan Coury, ZCE
http://blog.evan.pro/


On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'm calling it, as we need a decision.
>
> Evan -- "Config" is it.
>
> However, it needs to be applied across the framework.
>
> I look forward to your PR. :)
>
> -- Marco Pivetta <[hidden email]> wrote
> (on Friday, 13 July 2012, 11:24 PM +0200):
>> Thinkscape has quite a point with all the other `config`s around the library/
>> skeleton. I didn't think of it... If it is allowed, please consider me as a +1
>> for `Config` since the bc break has minor impact.
>> Marco Pivetta
>>
>> http://twitter.com/Ocramius
>>
>> http://marco-pivetta.com
>>
>>
>>
>> On 13 July 2012 23:14, Dolf Schimmel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>     1. ZF is used by developers
>>     2. Developers are lazy
>>     3. Having to type 'Configuration' is for those who are not lazy
>>     4. We abbreviate i18n and l10n with a reason
>>     5. config is a well respected shorted version for configuration.
>>
>>     conclusion: 'Config' is the one and only logical choice =)
>>
>>     Dolf
>>
>>     On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Adolfo Abegg <[hidden email]>
>>     wrote:
>>
>>
>>         +1 for standardization, +1 for Configuration over Config  :-)
>>
>>         best,
>>         Adolfo
>>
>>
>>
>>         On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Matus Zeman <[hidden email]>
>>         wrote:
>>
>>             I'm for Config - it's descriptive enough I think.
>>             but --- we should agree on this globally across whole ZF2. E.g. now
>>             we get application config from SM using 'Configuration' ... so I
>>             think these cases should be renamed also.
>>
>>             Matus
>>
>>
>>             On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Sascha-Oliver Prolic <
>>             [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>                 2012/7/13 Evan Coury <[hidden email]>:
>>                 > Hi all,
>>                 >
>>                 > I'm sure I'm not the only person who has realized this, but
>>                 the
>>                 > recognized method names in the Module class' have grown over
>>                 time to
>>                 > be inconsistent: getConfig(), getAutoloaderConfig() vs
>>                 > getServiceConfiguration(), getControllerPluginConfiguration
>>                 (). I'd
>>                 > like to see us normalize on either 'Config' or
>>                 'Configuration'. We're
>>                 > not RC yet, so we can technically justify the BC break, but
>>                 I'm
>>                 > curious what the overall opinion on this is? Worth it?
>>                 >
>>                 > ---
>>                 > Evan Coury, ZCE
>>                 > http://blog.evan.pro/
>>
>>                 I would prefere 'Configuration' over config, because I don't
>>                 see any
>>                 reason to shortname to 'Config'. BC break should be okay for
>>                 RC1.
>>
>>                 Best Regards
>>
>>                 Sascha
>>
>>                 --
>>                 Sascha-Oliver Prolic
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Matthew Weier O'Phinney
> Project Lead            | [hidden email]
> Zend Framework          | http://framework.zend.com/
> PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc
12