be a tiny and tight framework for many
people here.
So, I envision something new on the top of CakePHP--CakePlus, a
complete toolkit to build contemporary UIMS based sites. And, thinking
of hosting in Google Code or SF.net.
Basic idea for the toolkit:
1. Bundle MiBake template, Asset helper
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 11:09 AM, R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Community:
1. 100% open (svn, wiki, Google groups)
I'm wondering if by this you mean that anyone who wants can have
commit privileges to the repository?
--
Chris Hartjes
Internet Loudmouth
Motto for 2008:
On May 3, 7:45 pm, R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 3, 8:59 pm, nate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, for as quaintly egalitarian as your no authority clause is, it
doesn't fly in the real world. Even if developers aren't morons,
that doesn't mean that you won't get
On May 5, 6:52 pm, AD7six [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 3, 7:45 pm, R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 3, 8:59 pm, nate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, for as quaintly egalitarian as your no authority clause is, it
doesn't fly in the real world. Even if developers
On May 5, 6:07 pm, Chris Hartjes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 11:09 AM, R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Community:
1. 100% open (svn, wiki, Google groups)
I'm wondering if by this you mean that anyone who wants can have
commit privileges to the
On May 4, 8:17 pm, Dérico Filho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
First off, it is a fork. As a matter of voting, I am against and
thefore I shall not support it. I know I am no one, but it is a
thought anyway.
There is a particular clause I deemed to be disattached of reality.
CakePHP,
On May 4, 12:46 pm, keymaster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Way too ambitious to make all these changes and still keep up with
evolving cake releases, IMHO.
You're better off leaving the core as is, and just managing your value-
added stuff. That alone is a handful, but you'd get 80% of the
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:32 AM, R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 5, 6:07 pm, Chris Hartjes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 11:09 AM, R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Community:
1. 100% open (svn, wiki, Google groups)
The linux kernel.
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 12:47 PM, Chris Hartjes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:32 AM, R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 5, 6:07 pm, Chris Hartjes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 11:09 AM, R. Rajesh Jeba
On May 5, 2008, at 9:51 AM, Dardo Sordi Bogado wrote:
The linux kernel.
Sweet. I've been looking for a place to backup my funny videos
collection. Imagine being able to have them at my fingertips on *any*
linux machine I sit down to!!
Thanks for the tip.
-- John
On Mon, May 5, 2008
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:51 AM, Dardo Sordi Bogado
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The linux kernel.
Um, no.
In the end there is someone who decides what goes into the main linux
trunk or whatever you feel like calling it. Therefore, there is no
in developers we trust mechanism in place for
LOL!
Wasn't the source code for Windows leaked a while back? You mean I can add
Windows in there too? It'd be running *in* the Linux Core, so that should
resolve all its stability issues :P
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:58 AM, John David Anderson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 5, 2008, at
On May 5, 2008, at 10:08 AM, Dardo Sordi Bogado wrote:
Chris,
As you have a copy of full history, you can commit. You can't push to
Linus repository, as he didn't trust you. But he pulls directly from
the ones he trust, and examine the changes he thinks are worth
integrating. And there
If you think of patches in Trac as other pseudo repositories, this is
exactly how CakePHP works right now.
I know, just is more comfortable having that integrated in the SCM and
use a full blown repo.
And John, you are looking for the MOB branch ;) Browse
http://repo.or.cz and find
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Dardo Sordi Bogado
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chris,
As you have a copy of full history, you can commit. You can't push to
Linus repository, as he didn't trust you. But he pulls directly from
the ones he trust, and examine the changes he thinks are worth
I could argue about this all day, but I've had enough. Dardo, we are
arguing about semantics so we must agree to disagree.
I agree, I wasn't saying that git or it's model fits CakePHP or
everyone. I said that it could help in CakePlus.
CakePlus is an attempt to fork CakePHP, nothing
Personally I'd prefer to see all of this energy go into helping to
close tickets by writing tests, patches, documentation and offering
time/resources to join initiatives that need the help (i.e.
cookbook). I just find that helping is superior to forking for
everyone in the community, unless
That's a great idea, except that--in this instance--the motivation for
this CakePlus fork seems more about fixing parts of Cake which the
OP disagrees with rather than fixing outstanding bugs. Unless the core
devs were to agree to these changes being made they aren't going to be
in Trac for
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 9:17 PM, Chris Hartjes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:32 AM, R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 5, 6:07 pm, Chris Hartjes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 11:09 AM, R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah
[EMAIL
Way too ambitious to make all these changes and still keep up with
evolving cake releases, IMHO.
You're better off leaving the core as is, and just managing your value-
added stuff. That alone is a handful, but you'd get 80% of the benefit
with much less hassle.
Really, the best thing would be
Where's the nate that I was expecting to have teared him a new one
already? ;)
Seriously, though, I have to agree with nate and Tarique. Keeping the
project focussed seems to be key. I have all the confidence in the
world that the project will evolve in the right direction on it's own.
Yes, I
people here.
So, I envision something new on the top of CakePHP--CakePlus, a
complete toolkit to build contemporary UIMS based sites. And, thinking
of hosting in Google Code or SF.net.
Basic idea for the toolkit:
1. Bundle MiBake template, Asset helper, Bindable behavior, Validation
posted this sometime
agohttp://groups.google.com/group/cake-php/browse_frm/thread/949555be03d...
But, I understand Cake should be a tiny and tight framework for many
people here.
So, I envision something new on the top of CakePHP--CakePlus, a
complete toolkit to build contemporary UIMS
of CakePHP--CakePlus, a
complete toolkit to build contemporary UIMS based sites. And, thinking
of hosting in Google Code or SF.net.
Basic idea for the toolkit:
1. Bundle MiBake template, Asset helper, Bindable behavior, Validation
helper, Sluggable behavior, and other nice hacks plugs from Daniel
of CakePHP--CakePlus, a
complete toolkit to build contemporary UIMS based sites. And, thinking
of hosting in Google Code or SF.net.
Basic idea for the toolkit:
1. Bundle MiBake template, Asset helper, Bindable behavior, Validation
helper, Sluggable behavior, and other nice hacks plugs from Daniel
/949555be03d...
But, I understand Cake should be a tiny and tight framework for many
people here.
So, I envision something new on the top of CakePHP--CakePlus, a
complete toolkit to build contemporary UIMS based sites. And, thinking
of hosting in Google Code or SF.net.
Basic idea for the toolkit:
1
people here.
So, I envision something new on the top of CakePHP--CakePlus, a
complete toolkit to build contemporary UIMS based sites. And, thinking
of hosting in Google Code or SF.net.
Basic idea for the toolkit:
1. Bundle MiBake template, Asset helper, Bindable behavior
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 9:29 PM, nate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you really think you can do this, hey, more power to you, but so
far this plan doesn't even sound good in theory.
Nate I am sure all the devs have better things to do than write long
explanations of the obvious ;)
Cheers
Well, clearly some things aren't obvious to everybody. ;-)
On May 3, 12:09 pm, Dr. Tarique Sani [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 9:29 PM, nate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you really think you can do this, hey, more power to you, but so
far this plan doesn't even sound good in
On May 3, 8:59 pm, nate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, for as quaintly egalitarian as your no authority clause is, it
doesn't fly in the real world. Even if developers aren't morons,
that doesn't mean that you won't get n00bs who only think they know
what they're doing, or people who's
On May 3, 9:04 pm, Dardo Sordi Bogado [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Yes, It sounds like a fork. Anyway, maintaining a set of changes to
the core on top of the svn is easily done with git and quilt (as SCM
goes) but involves too much work from programmers.
I've tried to make a thing on top
I think, modifying core is necessary evil. To bend it for the
UIMS, it's extremely necessary.
I need to do my research in the area before arguing.
Another change that seems extremely
necessary is component vs model namespace confusion (You don't know
what is foo in $this-foo: if
That said, good lock!
That should be good luck!, ouch!
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
CakePHP group.
To post to this group, send email to cake-php@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group,
On May 3, 11:19 pm, Dardo Sordi Bogado [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think, modifying core is necessary evil. To bend it for the
UIMS, it's extremely necessary.
I need to do my research in the area before arguing.
Another change that seems extremely
necessary is component vs model
34 matches
Mail list logo
