-----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Namens Ernst Bunders Verzonden: vrijdag 5 augustus 2005 10:10 Aan: Discussion list for designers (front-end) Onderwerp: RE: [Users] Paper on the continuity of the MMBase community
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Namens Kees Jongenburger > Verzonden: donderdag 4 augustus 2005 19:40 > Aan: Discussion list for designers (front-end) > CC: Discussion list for developers > Onderwerp: Re: [Users] Paper on the continuity of the MMBase community > > > On 8/3/05, Ernst Bunders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > i tend to agree with you. Quite a lot is being done, and a lot of > > functionality is being sorted out and cleaned up, making > mmbase a much > > more understandable, usable and extensible product. To me mmbase > > development dousn't seem so slow. I think there is a > growing sense of > > what is mmbase (the core) and here stability, robustness and > > optimization are more important than new features. On the > other hand > > there is an influx of projects that deliver tools/add-ons > who are by > > their nature not so restricted. Quite a lot has changed in the code > > and the package structure, much for the better, even if it dous not > > bring a lot of new functionality straight away. Still i > thing things > > like functions (especially in 1.8), jstl intergration, fieldtypes > > wizard reconstructions are not to be sneezed upon. > First of all I sorry this thread is in the User list. > I agree that in general the development of MMBase is going in > right way. I agree that the new features like functions and > field types are good. With the way development goes the > chances you will run against bug are slimer. The only thing > is that it all only gets more complicated while the results > remains basicaly the same. well, this is not really true. One of your points is that mmbase needs more extensablility. I agree. One aspect of extensablility is comprihensibility. If the api becomes more clear, it will be much easyer to extend it. Allso i feel that the new code is generally developed with extensability in mind. What is often sadly lacking is documentation (if only apidoc). Mmbase is a real treasure of hidden features, and building things in a framework-like way is not quite enough. Especially frameworks are as usefull as they are well-documented. You should not have to know all the code, just what the framework dous, and where the extention points are and what exactly you have to provide to make use of them. > > The editwizards are one of the best examples I think of > things we already have put to much effort in. i agree, but there seems to be a real onslaught of editwizard development at present, which shoud bring a smile on anybody's face Ernst > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/users _______________________________________________ Developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
