Inquiry

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

Inquiry

Nayana Hettiarachchi - GMI

Hi All,

 

First of all I want to say that you guys have done a great job so far on the frame work, I only had time to browse through the documentation to see different functionality but I think your off to a very good start. Keep up the good work. I just want to inquire about something maybe it will sound stupid but I rather ask that wonder about it.

 

I know the current preview release is 0.1.3, do you recommend using this frame work on production systems or are you simply putting this out there for preview purposes only ? What’s the likely hood of the core of the current classes changing? The reason behind this is I had a very bad experience 5-6 years back when .NET beta 1 was released and then we started using it for our production code and then when they release beta 2 it was not compatible at all so we end up having to re-do everything.

 

I know you guys are much better than the folks who do .NET J but I just want to cross check on your thoughts.

 

Thanks in advance

 

Regards,

Nayana

 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Inquiry

Nick Lo
Hi Nayana,

I've been waiting for the next person to ask this question to bring  
my "Anticipatory 'Porting' to ZF" 16th May post, that got immediately  
buried by a surge of other posts, back to life.

I'll leave any specific response to your question to others but would  
like to throw mine back into the mix:

> I've noticed quite a few of the inevitable when will the ZF be, or  
> is it currently ready to use in production and these occasionally  
> become discussions about specific elements and I'm curious as to if  
> and how people are changing any of their current work in an  
> anticipation for incorporating the ZF?
>
> I, for example, have updated my system to use many of the  
> conventions mentioned in the Zend_Controller section of the manual,  
> such as; the front controller, Class_Name_To_Directories, directory  
> structuring, file naming, etc. The hosting providers I'm using have  
> not yet upgraded to php5 and my own system is still based on php4  
> code so it is a good point for me to be making changes anyway.
>
> I'd be quite interested to hear of the approaches others are  
> taking, partly with regards to which elements or conventions are  
> seen as stable/less likely to change too much, etc.

Also, isn't the zend framework site itself using ZF and if so, it  
would be interesting to hear of any particular approaches that were  
used in developing it to protect it from/prepare it for future  
changes to the framework.

Thanks,

Nick

> First of all I want to say that you guys have done a great job so  
> far on the frame work, I only had time to browse through the  
> documentation to see different functionality but I think your off  
> to a very good start. Keep up the good work. I just want to inquire  
> about something maybe it will sound stupid but I rather ask that  
> wonder about it.
>
> I know the current preview release is 0.1.3, do you recommend using  
> this frame work on production systems or are you simply putting  
> this out there for preview purposes only ? What’s the likely hood  
> of the core of the current classes changing? The reason behind this  
> is I had a very bad experience 5-6 years back when .NET beta 1 was  
> released and then we started using it for our production code and  
> then when they release beta 2 it was not compatible at all so we  
> end up having to re-do everything.
>
> I know you guys are much better than the folks who do .NET J but I  
> just want to cross check on your thoughts.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Inquiry

Christian Szardenings

Hi,

I'm too a little afraid of how much changes will be made to the existing
classes before 1.0 will be released. We're working on a complete
relaunch of or production envoirement (www.easyflirt.de) using ZF, and
we're planning to release our new version in 3th quarter of 2006.

Especially would you recommend to use the existing ZF classes (
Controller and DB stuff) in a production environment? Or will it be
likely that the existing class names and methods are changed in future
releases?

What about the naming conventions? Is it right that I don't expect these
to change ( naming, directory structure)?



Greetings
Christian

--
bitrockers GmbH     www.bitrockers.de
Moerser Str. 14a      40667 Meerbusch
T. 01805/200 248    F. 01805/200 249*
(* 12ct/min aus dem dt. Festnetz)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Inquiry

Jayson Minard (ZF)
In reply to this post by Nayana Hettiarachchi - GMI
You are in control of what version of the framework you are using.  As we
move forward, and we DO make changes, you can decide the timing of your
upgrade.  We will not halt changes in favor of API stability yet.  It is too
early to lock in and we need the flexibility for a while longer.

So expect change, but remember you are in control.

Also, we are not recommending the framework for production use.  If you
happen to feel it is enough for you now and want to give it a go anyway, be
sure to thoroughly test it in your context.  There are many issues we
haven't yet addressed, or may not even know about yet, and you would want to
uncover those.

As time moves by some areas will have their rate of change slow down, but
that isn't the case yet.

--j

 


On 5/23/06 6:31 AM, "Christian Szardenings" <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> I'm too a little afraid of how much changes will be made to the existing
> classes before 1.0 will be released. We're working on a complete
> relaunch of or production envoirement (www.easyflirt.de) using ZF, and
> we're planning to release our new version in 3th quarter of 2006.
>
> Especially would you recommend to use the existing ZF classes (
> Controller and DB stuff) in a production environment? Or will it be
> likely that the existing class names and methods are changed in future
> releases?
>
> What about the naming conventions? Is it right that I don't expect these
> to change ( naming, directory structure)?
>
>
>
> Greetings
> Christian
>
> --
> bitrockers GmbH     www.bitrockers.de
> Moerser Str. 14a      40667 Meerbusch
> T. 01805/200 248    F. 01805/200 249*
> (* 12ct/min aus dem dt. Festnetz)
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Inquiry

Arnaud Limbourg
Jayson Minard wrote:

> You are in control of what version of the framework you are using.  As we
> move forward, and we DO make changes, you can decide the timing of your
> upgrade.  We will not halt changes in favor of API stability yet.  It is too
> early to lock in and we need the flexibility for a while longer.
>
> So expect change, but remember you are in control.
>
> Also, we are not recommending the framework for production use.  If you
> happen to feel it is enough for you now and want to give it a go anyway, be
> sure to thoroughly test it in your context.  There are many issues we
> haven't yet addressed, or may not even know about yet, and you would want to
> uncover those.

That is a very broad statement, I assume some parts are more ready than
others it seems. idea in the wild, a page that lists components with a
status whether you feel it is ready or not.

Arnaud.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Inquiry

Jayson Minard (ZF)
I'll leave it broad until we do the review for 0.2.0 at which point we may
start tracking status in the way you would want (i.e. "API frozen" vs.
"Free-for-all").  

--j


On 5/23/06 9:13 AM, "Arnaud Limbourg" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Jayson Minard wrote:
>> You are in control of what version of the framework you are using.  As we
>> move forward, and we DO make changes, you can decide the timing of your
>> upgrade.  We will not halt changes in favor of API stability yet.  It is too
>> early to lock in and we need the flexibility for a while longer.
>>
>> So expect change, but remember you are in control.
>>
>> Also, we are not recommending the framework for production use.  If you
>> happen to feel it is enough for you now and want to give it a go anyway, be
>> sure to thoroughly test it in your context.  There are many issues we
>> haven't yet addressed, or may not even know about yet, and you would want to
>> uncover those.
>
> That is a very broad statement, I assume some parts are more ready than
> others it seems. idea in the wild, a page that lists components with a
> status whether you feel it is ready or not.
>
> Arnaud.
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Inquiry

Nayana Hettiarachchi - GMI
In reply to this post by Nayana Hettiarachchi - GMI
Jason,

Thanks for the insight,

Since I am involved with a very large scale project maybe I will wait
for a future version. Though I am more interested in getting advantage
of Zend_Db.

Can anyone let me know if you have started using the Db class for any
production level projects?

Regards,
Nayana


-----Original Message-----
From: Jayson Minard [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 8:54 AM
To: Christian Szardenings; [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [fw-general] Inquiry

You are in control of what version of the framework you are using.  As
we
move forward, and we DO make changes, you can decide the timing of your
upgrade.  We will not halt changes in favor of API stability yet.  It is
too
early to lock in and we need the flexibility for a while longer.

So expect change, but remember you are in control.

Also, we are not recommending the framework for production use.  If you
happen to feel it is enough for you now and want to give it a go anyway,
be
sure to thoroughly test it in your context.  There are many issues we
haven't yet addressed, or may not even know about yet, and you would
want to
uncover those.

As time moves by some areas will have their rate of change slow down,
but
that isn't the case yet.

--j

 


On 5/23/06 6:31 AM, "Christian Szardenings" <[hidden email]>
wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> I'm too a little afraid of how much changes will be made to the
existing

> classes before 1.0 will be released. We're working on a complete
> relaunch of or production envoirement (www.easyflirt.de) using ZF, and
> we're planning to release our new version in 3th quarter of 2006.
>
> Especially would you recommend to use the existing ZF classes (
> Controller and DB stuff) in a production environment? Or will it be
> likely that the existing class names and methods are changed in future
> releases?
>
> What about the naming conventions? Is it right that I don't expect
these

> to change ( naming, directory structure)?
>
>
>
> Greetings
> Christian
>
> --
> bitrockers GmbH     www.bitrockers.de
> Moerser Str. 14a      40667 Meerbusch
> T. 01805/200 248    F. 01805/200 249*
> (* 12ct/min aus dem dt. Festnetz)
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Inquiry

Jayson Minard (ZF)
We use Zend_Db and many other parts of the framework in production already
(devzone.zend.com and framework.zend.com).  I'm not saying you can't, just
that you take on some of the burden of having to keep your code current as
the framework changes if you want to keep up with patches.

We will not limit change right now due to the use of it in production.  In
other words, your possible need for less change will not override the need
for the framework to get where it needs to go.

About your specific topic...  Zend_Db is fairly stable, although the Table
class might change a bit with work coming in that is similar for the
ActiveRecord pattern (DataObject).  There might also be an addition of
methods in different Db classes to provide alternative methods for avoiding
quoting when you want to pass in literal values, functions, or constants to
the database.   The default will still be quoting and the safety it
provides.

--j






On 5/23/06 9:34 AM, "Nayana Hettiarachchi" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Jason,
>
> Thanks for the insight,
>
> Since I am involved with a very large scale project maybe I will wait
> for a future version. Though I am more interested in getting advantage
> of Zend_Db.
>
> Can anyone let me know if you have started using the Db class for any
> production level projects?
>
> Regards,
> Nayana
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jayson Minard [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 8:54 AM
> To: Christian Szardenings; [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [fw-general] Inquiry
>
> You are in control of what version of the framework you are using.  As
> we
> move forward, and we DO make changes, you can decide the timing of your
> upgrade.  We will not halt changes in favor of API stability yet.  It is
> too
> early to lock in and we need the flexibility for a while longer.
>
> So expect change, but remember you are in control.
>
> Also, we are not recommending the framework for production use.  If you
> happen to feel it is enough for you now and want to give it a go anyway,
> be
> sure to thoroughly test it in your context.  There are many issues we
> haven't yet addressed, or may not even know about yet, and you would
> want to
> uncover those.
>
> As time moves by some areas will have their rate of change slow down,
> but
> that isn't the case yet.
>
> --j
>
>  
>
>
> On 5/23/06 6:31 AM, "Christian Szardenings" <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm too a little afraid of how much changes will be made to the
> existing
>> classes before 1.0 will be released. We're working on a complete
>> relaunch of or production envoirement (www.easyflirt.de) using ZF, and
>> we're planning to release our new version in 3th quarter of 2006.
>>
>> Especially would you recommend to use the existing ZF classes (
>> Controller and DB stuff) in a production environment? Or will it be
>> likely that the existing class names and methods are changed in future
>> releases?
>>
>> What about the naming conventions? Is it right that I don't expect
> these
>> to change ( naming, directory structure)?
>>
>>
>>
>> Greetings
>> Christian
>>
>> --
>> bitrockers GmbH     www.bitrockers.de
>> Moerser Str. 14a      40667 Meerbusch
>> T. 01805/200 248    F. 01805/200 249*
>> (* 12ct/min aus dem dt. Festnetz)
>>
>
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Inquiry

Mike Naberezny-2
In reply to this post by Nick Lo
Nick Lo wrote:
> Also, isn't the zend framework site itself using ZF and if so, it
> would be interesting to hear of any particular approaches that were
> used in developing it to protect it from/prepare it for future changes
> to the framework.

The website is kept in its own SVN and its library directory is synced
to a release tag of the framework with svn:externals.  I wrote about
fifty functional tests for the website that test every page.

When a new release of the framework is made, I set the svn:externals
property to point to the new release tag and update.  I then run the
functional tests.  If anything fails, I fix it and run the tests again.  
I do this until they all pass.

Deployment is automated with a shell script.  After I make a change to
the website and all the tests pass, I check it into the SVN.  The shell
script exports the framework website from SVN, runs the functional
tests, and then checks PHPUnit's return code.  If any of the tests fail,
it aborts before going live.

phpunit AllTests
if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
    echo "Functional tests FAILED -- deployment aborted"
    exit 1
fi

Mike


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Inquiry

Nick Lo
Hi Mike,

I appreciate your sharing that. I now feel impressed, a little  
humbled and resolved to chanting a unit-testing mantra with commitment!

Thanks,

Nick

> The website is kept in its own SVN and its library directory is  
> synced to a release tag of the framework with svn:externals.  I  
> wrote about fifty functional tests for the website that test every  
> page.
>
> When a new release of the framework is made, I set the  
> svn:externals property to point to the new release tag and update.  
> I then run the functional tests.  If anything fails, I fix it and  
> run the tests again.  I do this until they all pass.
>
> Deployment is automated with a shell script.  After I make a change  
> to the website and all the tests pass, I check it into the SVN.  
> The shell script exports the framework website from SVN, runs the  
> functional tests, and then checks PHPUnit's return code.  If any of  
> the tests fail, it aborts before going live.
>
> phpunit AllTests
> if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
>    echo "Functional tests FAILED -- deployment aborted"
>    exit 1
> fi