-- Pádraic Brady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote (on Tuesday, 26 June 2007, 07:24 AM -0700): > Zend_View Enhanced is 100% backwards compatible contrary to Ralph's assertion > otherwise. The sole exception is if RC3 did something which impacted my own > code (I doubt it). > > Backwards compatibility has been a primary goal for the ZF Release Candidacy > process and it's noted in the both the proposal's overview and requirements > that BC must be maintained post ZF 1.0.0. ;)
Much as I'd like to get some form of layout support in prior to 1.0.0GA, there simply isn't enough time. Both Ralph's and Paddy's proposals have merit, and I need to evaluate them and determine what direction best fits the MVC (or if a combination of each fits best, or if neither make sense...), then code and test, document, etc. The release is in 6 days, and currently ZF is not my only duty. You do the math. (For the record, layout support was only requested and considered after the initial view integration happened in the 0.9.x series, and really only feasible with enhancements that have happened in both the controller and view components during the RC releases. It shouldn't be surprising that it won't be ready for 1.0.0; what *should* be surprising is that we have any controller/view integration at all. :-) ) Layout support *will* happen in ZF -- just post 1.0.0. All the more reason to stick around with the project. :-) > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 2:21:42 PM > Subject: Re: Fw: [fw-general] Two-Step View, subclassing controller, etc > > On Tuesday 26 June 2007 04:01, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote: > > -- Arthur M. Kang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > > There's plenty of interest. The issue right now is getting a stable and > > tested version of ZF out the door that developers can rely on. We are in > > RC status, which means, loosely, no new features, and bugfixes/security > > fixes only. (I say loosely, as there have been a few new features > > creeping in, but most have been backwards compatible or augment existing > > functionality.) > > The Zend_View Enhanced proposal is also backwards comaptible isn't it? > > Complex views are inherent in just about any serious site I come across these > days and so an unnavoidable part of any real world demo a reviewer might > write. So surely this is about as "core" as you can get in ZF? > > I have a site based on Perl written in 2001 that desparately needs a re-write > and I must admit I did not think I'd be coding it using these old view > techniques again 6 years later, but I too feel the urgency to get hold of a > version 1 stable release so I can understand the pressure to lock it down. > > I just hope the independant reviewers don't continue to characterise ZF as no > more than "promising" when 1.0 stable is announced. It deserves better. -- Matthew Weier O'Phinney PHP Developer | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Zend - The PHP Company | http://www.zend.com/
