Re: [Fofredux-devel] Re: MVC rethought

[khaled A. A. <bro...@gm...>]

Reason I'm not saying much is because I'm kinda out of my depth here with
regards to reasons for starting from the ground up etc. I will say that we
really should be aiming for a tabless design as this will make anyone
wanting to play around with the look of their install, a pretty easy task.
I'm going to wait until the dust settles as to which route we're planning o=
n
going down, but needless to say I'm well looking forward to applying the
style to interface.

On 4/30/06, Evan Roth <eva...@gm...> wrote:
>
> Hey guys,
>
> me again.  i've spent the last day thinking about all of this stuff
> more intensively.
>
> i was going to start on making everything multi-user, which is not so
> complicated, but it requires a lot of adding/rewriting of core
> logic...since we always need to retrieve only the logged in user's
> stuff.  and i can't bring myself to take that step when everything is,
> as we say in the office, spaghetti code.
>
> in order to solve this problem, there are two things that need to be
> done first, which i'm going to just jump in and get started on:
> 1. the code desperately needs to be refactored.
> 2. the view needs to be broken up and simplified.
>
> my initial thoughts yesterday were that the only option was to apply a
> professional framework here.  i spent most of the day playing with
> CakePHP, which is pretty damn cool.  but in the end, i admit that i
> was probably wrong, as it would be, as they say in german "mit Kanonen
> auf Spatzen schie=DFen" which is a nice figurative that translates like
> "shooting at sparrows with cannons"...in other words, way overkill for
> what we need.  [although, if we were starting the application brand
> new, it may still be a decent choice]
>
> in any case, in regards to my 2 points above:
> 1.  i see that Kev began laying the foundation for this yesterday.
> i'm going to simply jump in and help out there, whenever i need a
> function, i'll simply add it to a class.  this will eventually tone
> down init.php over time.  if someone has a better idea on how to
> systematically chop at this let me know.  in any case, i'd start in on
> the options and users,  since that's what i had on the table for the
> next step towards multi-user.
> [note:  Kev, i'd recommend you rename actions/entities to
> controllers/models respectively, since that is more standard
> terminology]
>
> 2.  essentially each of the existing scripts is in some way or other
> the view, but in most cases more than needed.  i'd like to be able to
> split this apart into more code blocks doing 1 small task each.  we
> could choose to use some sort of templating engine (such as smarty),
> but i doubt it's necessary.  in the end, this makes it super simple
> for Andrew to plug in his ajax stuff and for Khaled to create a decent
> stylesheet.
>
> ok enough from me...it'd be interesting to hear thoughts from the rest of
> you.
> /evan
>
>
> On 4/30/06, Evan Roth <eva...@gm...> wrote:
> > hey,
> >
> > kev, i see that you've started to put in the...um...framework for a
> framework.
> >
> > after chopping apart the options page today, i became a little
> > disheartened.  currently our controller is a big fat blob and the view
> > is a mess.
> >
> > in order to get any kind of css to play nicely, we really need to
> > strip out a nice view and keep it super simple:
> > for example, the feeds list, should be 1 view, which is then invoked
> > from the panel or frameset or whatever.  right now, this same list is
> > coded almost identically in feeds.php (framed) and panel.php (normal).
> >
> > i'm really getting the feeling that we should just bite the bullet and
> > switch to a php framework...which will make everyone's job easier in
> > the end, even if it is a bit of work up front.
> > i've never used any php specific ones (only struts for our jsp stuff
> > at work), so can't make a good suggestion.  been reading quite a bit
> > about symfony lately, but it might be only php5.  otherwise, i've
> > heard good about cakephp, since it seems to be emulating rails, and
> > thus riding the popularity wave.
> > i'd imagine we'd be much better off implementing something that's
> > already available, rather than trying to build our own.
> >
> > in any case, my concern is not so much the fat init.php, but the view
> > that is all over the place.  and if we want to really push out a nice
> > tableless, css based UI, we need a really efficient view.  (this also
> > helps if we decide to go down the ajax road as well)
> >
> > anyway...just thought i'd add my 2 cents...perhaps some of the other
> > devs have some thoughts.  discussion is always good.  if it should be
> > done, i don't mind jumping in the cold water and starting with it.  i
> > just want to pass off some clean simple markup to khaled ASAP, so we
> > can begin seeing some initial versions of the new UI...that will be
> > really exciting...
> >
> > /evan
> >
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job
> easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronim=
o
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnk&kid=120709&bid&3057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> Fofredux-devel mailing list
> Fof...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fofredux-devel
>