[Vtigercrm-developers] vt6 versus zf2

[Joe Bordes]

It isn't a price to pay for forking, even if you have been playing by 
the (scarce) rules it is still a nightmare. I think the biggest problem 
is the lack of transparency and knowledge. We have no idea what vtiger 
is doing, we have no participation in the changes being made, we don't 
even see them coming, all of a sudden you have months worth of work to 
understand a whole new set of rules and code base with no real clues as 
to where to start or continue. You might just as well start with any 
other code base from scratch. That said, we have nothing to reproach, we 
are here because we want to, if you don't like it, change it. I'm sure 
you'll see that it isn't easy at all.

While we decide and try to keep pace, it does feel good to vent off a 
little once in a while  :-)

Joe
TSolucio

On 19/02/13 22:28, Richard Hills wrote:
> 1 - Unfortunately we're in the same boat. I am hoping that at least 
> some vtlib module migrations will be straight forward, however have 
> ignored this completely so far as I await a rc.
> 2 - This is the price we pay for forking the base of the system right?
>
> On 20/02/13 10:14, Adam Heinz wrote:
>> I don't know about anybody else, but in order to migrate to vt6, I'm 
>> looking at:
>> 1. rewrite sixteen custom modules
>> 2. reimplement all vt5 patches for vt6
>>
>> Without any sort of adapter to provide backwards compatibility, I am 
>> forced to do all this work at once, instead of being able to spread 
>> it out over time as I respond to our normal queue of bugs and feature 
>> requests.  As far as one might "prefer one hard redesign, without 
>> compatibility," I think that's only true when you have a deprecation 
>> period to make the transition.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Stefan Warnat <ich at stefanwarnat.de 
>> <mailto:ich at stefanwarnat.de>> wrote:
>>
>>     I don't have look at details of the vtiger6 structure vtiger6 and
>>     I think it isn't a perfect system,
>>     but I think anything inside the modules directory will be deleted
>>     on release date and later modules will be only in vtiger6 directory.
>>
>>     My experience is, that files from "modules" Directory won't be
>>     used inside new vtiger6 theme.
>>
>>     But probably it's true, most/all vtiger developer prefer one hard
>>     redesign, without compatibility, before lots of little changes,
>>     which needs lots of tests/work with every version.
>>
>>     Freelancer at Webdevelopment
>>
>>     *Web*: http://www.stefanwarnat.de
>>     *Xing*: https://www.xing.com/profile/Stefan_Warnat2
>>     *eMail*: ich at stefanwarnat.de <mailto:ich at stefanwarnat.de>
>>     *
>>     Telefon*: 0162 / 2548568
>>     (Werktags 12 - 18 Uhr)
>>
>>     Am 19.02.2013 16:36, schrieb Adam Heinz:
>>>     "Keep the vtiger6 code operational?"  How about keeping the
>>>     vtiger5 code operational?!  You forked your own modules to
>>>     create the vtiger6 subfolder.  I have no idea how I'm supposed
>>>     to merge a branch that contains a partial copy of itself, much
>>>     less attempt to preserve any sort of merge/edit history.  This
>>>     is the largest bowl of copy pasta I've ever encountered in
>>>     fifteen years of professional development.  It shows a grave
>>>     lack of restraint and/or understanding of how to refactor a
>>>     system while keeping it operational.
>>>
>>>
>>>     On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Prasad <prasad at vtiger.com
>>>     <mailto:prasad at vtiger.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>         Adam,
>>>
>>>         We did have a look at several frameworks and evolved a
>>>         simple one that
>>>         can give us better control to keep the vtiger6 code
>>>         operational with 5.x while
>>>         our dev-team is on making progress.
>>>
>>>         Please do share your feedback if you find anything
>>>         essentially lacking in vtiger6 framework.
>>>
>>>         Regards,
>>>         Prasad
>>>
>>>
>>>         On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 3:06 AM, Adam Heinz
>>>         <amh at metricwise.net <mailto:amh at metricwise.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>>             I'm poking around in vgcal right now and am extremely
>>>             glad to see how much Zend code it uses.  Did you guys
>>>             consider using ZendFramework 2 MVC instead of rolling
>>>             your own for vtiger6?
>>>
>>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.vtigercrm.com/pipermail/vtigercrm-developers/attachments/20130219/edb480df/attachment-0001.html