My proposal is not for something that would be part of the Cake core but rather a structured repository for add-ons.
If the repository is well structured and organized users can easily download add-ons and just plug them into the cake framework. The installed add-ons will know what other add-ons are required to be installed, maybe even auto-magically install them, and provide hooks and call backs for other add-ons to use. In the end the repository should have a nice collection of usefull add- ons such as a blog, gallery, homepage, theme-manager, news-manager, links manager etc. All the stuff that you find in most CMS systems. When the user wants to build a site they simply install the modules they need and voila, they all integrate nicely and co-exist beautifully. There's no search through endless lists of code snippets etc on cakeforge. There is only one Blog add-on and it has been co-developed by a bunch of contributors and certified by the Cake Repository Admins (I.e. It is well coded and plays nice with all the other add-ons). If there is a feature that someone thinks it needs they can develop it and submit the changes to be added to the next release. On Mar 14, 10:46 am, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I had a very similar idea a while > agohttp://groups.google.com/group/cake-php/browse_thread/thread/555531e7... > My idea never made it though (phpnut found it too application specific > to be put in the framework) > > On Mar 14, 8:58 am, "adi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > This is my first post here and I must confess I am somewhat of a Cake > > newbie. I am however an experienced PHP developer, and web-designer. I > > have spent many years dabbling in a number of CMS systems from Nuke to > > CPG-Nuke to Joomla to Xoops to Drupal. > > > They all have their various pro's and con's (some more con's than > > pro's) but I think very few are easy to implement and customize > > without a huge learning curve. > > > I must say I was very excited when I came across the cake framework as > > I have spent some time working in ASP.NET and really liked Ruby on > > Rails but was reluctant to try and learn ANOTHER language just to > > derive the benefit of an MVC architecture on an Open Source platform. > > > The Cake Software Foundation is obviously a dedicated group of > > developers and by and large I think the cake project is managed and > > presented very professionally and indeed very well. I think it is > > porabably obvious to all of us that cake provides the tools to build > > some very exciting (I'm tempted to say Web 2.0 but I'm not a big fan > > of buzz-words) web-based apps. That said I think Cake has a huge > > amount of untapped potential. > > > This brings me to my proposal. I'm sure many of you are familiar with > > PEAR. The PHP Extension and Application repository. Essentially a > > structured and managed repository of PHP scripts designed to fulfill > > everyday tasks. The code is all written according to strict > > conventions and all extensions are part of an extensive hierarchy of > > dependencies. > > > You may say that Cake has the CakeForge. I disagree. CakeForge serves > > it's purpose as a meeting place for Cake Developers to share ideas and > > code snippets. It also hosts cake based projects and initially I would > > anticipate the Cake EAR being hosted on Cake Forge. What the EAR would > > have that Cake Forge does not is a strict dependency map/hierarchy. In > > other words if I develop a Blogging extension that requires the User > > Managment extension this dependency is explicitly specified. > > > In the same way as PEAR has extended the PHP language the Cake EAR > > would do the same for Cake. It would be structure and controlled. In > > this way we prevent repetition and confusion. Why should developers > > scour through CakeForge picking and choosing between 5 different > > components that do the same thing when they would be better served > > accessing the the Cake EAR finding the single extension that they > > require. They can then rest assured that this extension has been co- > > developed and refined by a number of developers and coded according to > > the strict coding conventions and best practices as specified by the > > Cake EAR requirements. > > > Each extension will be, essentially, a separate project. Bugs and > > Feature requests will be addressed as they arise and contributions > > will be incorporated into the code as they are presented. > > > At the end of the day Cake has the potential to be RAD developers > > great weapon and we can't expect all the features that every website > > would like (Blog, User management, Gallery etc) to be bundled into the > > core of Cake so why not have easily pluggable, well documented and > > reliable extensions stored in a well organized structured repository > > with a finite dependency hierarchy and a clear development road map? > > > Obviously it is early days and I wanted to really feel the waters > > first and see if anyone is interested in joining me on my quest to > > establish a strong Cake EAR. If you've read this far you must have > > some opinion on the matter... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cake PHP" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
