Re: [Envolution-devel] File Prefix's

[Scott K. <sc...@ki...>]

On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 09:21, Sergey Alexandrov wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
>     Actually I do not see any points to remome prefix except one: jump
> put of 
>     PN. 

If you wanted PN in the first place you shouldn't even be using
Envolution. 

> Why? 

Because Envolution does not want to be a PN clone forever.

> There are a lot of modules and blocks, that was written for PN,
>     using pnAPI, and a lot of ppl continued write software for PN. Why
> you want
>     to drop compatibility? 

No one said anything about dropping compatibility. 

> I'm sure, PN team not going to drop prefix.

I don't care what PN team does or doesn't do....this is not PN!

>  
> Compatibility layer? Good idea. But why? 

To keep some compatibility with PN.


> For useing enoAPI, envoHTML and so on?
>     Ok, let's create compatibility layers for all open source CMS you
> can find.
>     Do you really need it? 

Some may, some may not.

> Probably you, guys have to do a lot of work to cleanup code
>     before change compatibility level of Envo. What do you mean
> "central api"?
>     Guys, there are "central API" - this is pnAPI. It was developed a
> long time, a lot of
>     ppls are using it, and you decided to destroy that? Why? To make
> Envo dominant?

First off whenever I hear someone say "destroy" in regard to Envolution
I laugh. No one is destroying anything. In fact we are trying to improve
and make better the CMS.

Your assessment that anything is destroyed is based on what exactly? I
would assume it's based on misinformation or no information. To
immediately assume and proclaim that someone is destroying something
simply because things are changing is outrageous. The only fact in life
is that things will change! If you can't accept change then your in for
a rough ride no matter what context it is used in. 


>     You have to think more to start this work. Main goal of using
> pnAPI - compatibility
>     and it's not nessesarly to create additional layer . If you want
> to, just create ENVO 
>     compatibility layer, and write all you, guys want, but leave space
> for those, who
>     want to use Envo core with pnModules and pnBlocks. 

This, as I've said before is NOT PostNuke if you wanted PN then go use
PostNuke.

> 
>     Don't forget to remove  _pn_ prefixes from table and column names
> - that will be
>     "point of no return" for Envo.
> 
> Thank you very much. 
> 
> Serg aka Goblin.
> 

Hopefully prefixes will be removed from the database table as well. You
call that a "point of no return"...I call it a "point of departure".

The fact is this: Envolution wants to have as much compatability with PN
due to the wide variety of modules and blocks out there currently in
use. But not at the expense of our own identity...this after all is a
fork of PN and as a fork is meant to progress and develop into it's own
unique CMS....I should know as thats what I and three others founded the
project on. The belief that Envolution would evolve from a common code
tree once shared with PN into a unique and better code tree we could
call our own.

So...decide what is best for you and follow your decision to achieve
your goals. But don't come here and say that using PN's api and PN's
core and PN's this, and PN's that....cause if you feel that strongly
about PN's code then you should really be using PN. If Brian, Brandon,
Max, and I wanted to be like PostNuke forever we never would have
founded Envolution in the first place.

Zoom