I think it's a great idea. It will get more developers involved and offer
more solutions to the users.
Here is another idea. I did a little experiment last year and created a test
suite in order to get other developers interested in the ZF. I added around
8 test cases, each test had its own page, and each page had a div with 2
tabs, "example" and "source code". It was a huge success.
I think this is something very important that's actually missing in the
website. It would be nice to see Reference Guide - APIs - Videos and Test
Suite. IMO code is the best documentation, it helps users understand what a
component does and how it works straight away, and of course, they get to
see real examples.
Fed
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wil Sinclair" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Logan Buesching" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "till" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 7:28 PM
Subject: RE: [fw-general] ZF Proposal Process and Packaging. . .
And that's exactly the intention- to support development of components
that are 'Zend Framework' components but that we can't support. What
makes a component a 'Zend Framework' component? Well, sitting alongside
ZF code in the library, using ZF coding standings, and having
dependencies on other framework components is certainly a good start.
But I would argue that more important than any one of those factors is
the assurance of quality that comes from unit test coverage and design
review from the Zend Framework community. This assurance is something we
definitely want to bring to extras as well, so the intention is not to
allow a components of lower quality, rather to allow components that we
can distribute while not supporting them.
,Wil
-----Original Message-----
From: Logan Buesching [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 9:34 AM
To: till
Cc: Wil Sinclair; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [fw-general] ZF Proposal Process and Packaging. . .
Hello,
Although I'm not sure how much my 2 cents weigh, I would like to say
that I would really enjoy this feature.
till wrote:
> In general people look at the Zend Framework because they want
> well-tested code. Code which is free to use (in regard to license)
> etc.. I think support is another issue which people kind of expect
> from you when they download of the zend.com domain. Now if only
> everything but extras is qualified to meet the standards you set
upon
> yourself, the rest should be dropped all together. It's messy
> otherwise.
>
I do agree that when people see Zend, and especially the Zend
Framework,
they believe that it is quality code. This is why they are suggesting
that code in 'extras' meet their own requirements (or at least most of
them), but Zend themselves cannot support due to it's size. I look at
this the same way that many Linux distributions have 'official'
packages
that they support, then they have extras that are in the repository,
but
they don't support (as in Ubuntu and Universal). I think that it is a
wonderful idea, because it allows us developers to get a lot more
features that will most likely be pretty well tested, but maybe not
pristine.
I would think that extending the Zend Framework would be a hassle if
there is no way for the community to distribute their own
contributions
through the help of Zend.
