I agree, with both of you :) I don't think we need to swallow the project whole or cultivate an overarching bureaucracy since the ZF team provides the necessary tooling, processes, etc
At the same time, I think that a small group of us could put out a substantial chunk and that the quality of that chunk should be greater than it would be if we were to work separately. Also, assuming that a good proposal is easier to get through than a poor one, we can leverage some teamwork to ensure that we submit the best proposals possible. Here are my recommendations for those initial components which I believe represents the components necessary to swap out Zend_Db with Doctrine: - ZendX_Doctrine_Application_Resource_DoctrineManager - ZendX_Doctrine_Tool_Framework_Project_DoctrineCliProvider - ZendX_Doctrine_Log_Writer_Table - ZendX_Doctrine_Session_SaveHandler_Table - ZendX_Doctrine_Auth_Adapter_Table - ZendX_Doctrine_Paginator_Adapter_Collection Jason has already submitted proposals for Auth_Adapter_Table and Paginator_Adapter_Collection have proposals in the works. Please review these if you haven't already. Tomek Pęszor has started working on Session_SaveHandler_Table and Application_Resource_DoctrineManager. Please review his implementations here: http://wiki.github.com/taat/myzend http://github.com/taat/myzend/tree/doctrine This leaves - ZendX_Doctrine_Tool_Framework_Project_DoctrineCliProvider and ZendX_Doctrine_Log_Writer_Table. Zend_Tool looks daunting but I hope Ralph will be able to offer some guidance. Any takers? I'd be more than happy to work on either, or both if necessary. Here is a list of additional, potential components that have been noted thus far: ZendX_Doctrine_CodeGenerator_Form and/or some Form Generator and/or Form/Model integration Doctrine event listeners? .. debug, log, test? Doctrine with Lucene Search w/ Doctrine listeners that update the index on save/insert/delete Doctrine with Zend_Amf to allow direct remoting to the model layer Any others? Jasone wrote: > > I suggest we simply start by rolling out functionality that already exists > in the framework (adapters and such), and then roll out new features from > there, things that don't even exist in the framework itself, like an acl > with db. > > > Jason > > On May 12, 2009 2:14pm, Josh Team <[email protected]> wrote: >> I personally think we are putting the horse before the cart. This > >> doesn't have to be one huge project.. If we have any type of review > >> processes, which we will in being an Open Source community, we can > >> break down the project into smaller independent integration points. > >> (eg Zend Acl w/ Doctrine - Doctrine CRUD Plug & Play Module - > >> Zend_Search w/ Doctrine Plugin Listener - Etc) we use Assembla or some > >> other free Open Source site to allow a wiki / ticket creation and let > >> whoever wants to jump on the different teams and help. So we as a > >> community work on the overall project, but the projects are agnostic > >> to each other.. once we have the building blocks we can all see the > >> best way to package it together. Roles will become self evident in > >> each project as certain people will champion certain things naturally. > > > >> Just my $.02 > > > >> On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 11:52 AM, Ralph Schindler > >> [email protected]> wrote: > >> > Yeah, this is more or less what you'd need to implement. > >> > > >> > Off the top of your head, can you think of what "development time" >> tasks > >> > should be exposed? What will the tool be doing for the developer? > >> > > >> > -ralph > >> > > >> > Matthew Lurz wrote: > >> >> > >> >> I think a Zend Tool Project Provider is what I may be looking for >> instead. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Matthew Lurz wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> Thanks Josh. I hadn't thought of those and that's exactly the kind of > >> >>> input needed to get a handle on the potential scope. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> Josh Team wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>> I'm an avid user of both ZF and Doctrine. Time is short on my end >> but > >> >>>> I can help here and there. Two things I've done with ZF & Doctrine >> is > >> >>>> merge Doctrine with Lucene Search w/ Doctrine listeners that update > >> >>>> the index on save/insert/delete. I've also merged Doctrine with > >> >>>> Zend_Amf to allow remoting to interact right with the ORM layer. >> There > >> >>>> are a lot of other possible touch points like, Zend_Navigation - > >> >>>> Zend_Acl - etc.. where we could merge the two frameworks. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Matthew Lurz [email protected]> >> wrote: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Thanks Jason!! > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Clearly others, such as yourself, have exerted more effort than I >> in > >> >>>>> creating proposals, etc. I only hope to help in whatever way >> possible. > >> >>>>> Feel > >> >>>>> free to interject, but a tentative plan to move forward might look > >> >>>>> something > >> >>>>> like: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> 1) Gather momentum and get a few dedicated people on board > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> 2) Analyze/review potential integration points and agree on the >> initial > >> >>>>> scope of the library > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> 3) Gather/modify/normalize existing/proposed components > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> 4) Implement additional components within the initial scope > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> 5) Provide a roadmap for enhancements taking into consideration >> changes > >> >>>>> to > >> >>>>> the ZF and Doctrine > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> I'm assuming that you've gone through the process of signing the >> CLA, > >> >>>>> etc? I > >> >>>>> have not and so would need to review this information and go >> through > >> >>>>> the > >> >>>>> necessary process. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Thanks again for the feedback. Let me know if you have any other > >> >>>>> recommendations, ideas, etc. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Jasone wrote: > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> I am able, and have the time, to do this. I authored two of those > >> >>>>>> proposals. Been waiting on the zend team :) > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> (Or now that I look, maybe they're not moved to "ready for review" > >> >>>>>> yet?) > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> Jason > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> On May 8, 2009 6:16pm, Matthew Lurz [email protected]> wrote: > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> !!! Calling All Doctrine/ZF Users !!! > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> While the ZF wiki contains several Doctrine related proposals, >> there > >> >>>>>>> doesn't > >> >>>>>>> seem to exist a cohesive movement toward tying together these 2 > >> >>>>>>> excellent > >> >>>>>>> pieces of software. With the benefits of doing so being so great, > >> >>>>>>> let's > >> >>>>>>> band > >> >>>>>>> together for this purpose! > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> If you are a potential recipient of these benefits, would you be > >> >>>>>>> interested > >> >>>>>>> in > >> >>>>>>> using or contributing to the development of such an integration > >> >>>>>>> library? > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> If so, read on and reply.. > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> A brief survey of potential integration points (1) turned up: > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> ZendX_Doctrine_Application_Resource_Manager (2) > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> ZendX_Doctrine_Tool_Framework_Client > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> ZendX_Doctrine_Log_Writer_Table > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> ZendX_Doctrine_Session_SaveHandler_Table > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> ZendX_Doctrine_Auth_Adapter_Table (3) > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> ZendX_Doctrine_Paginator_Adapter_Collection (3) > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> ZendX_Doctrine_CodeGenerator_Form (3) > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> --- > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> It wasn't my intent to define scope or vision, but the general >> intent > >> >>>>>>> of > >> >>>>>>> each > >> >>>>>>> should be somewhat self-evident. > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Integration points moving in the other direction exist as well. >> I've > >> >>>>>>> yet > >> >>>>>>> to > >> >>>>>>> evaluate these relationships, but one possibility is Doctrine >> event > >> >>>>>>> listeners > >> >>>>>>> using Zend_Log for profiling, debugging, etc. > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Have I missed any potential integration points? Any other >> comments? > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> 1) ZendX_Doctrine is the proposed namespace > >> >>>>>>> 2) I have some very basic, working code if anyone is interested > >> >>>>>>> 3) Proposal exists on ZF wiki > >> >>>>>>> -- > >> >>>>>>> View this message in context: > >> >>>>>>> >> http://www.nabble.com/RFC%3A-ZendX_Doctrine-tp23454552p23454552.html > >> >>>>>>> Sent from the Zend Framework mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>> -- > >> >>>>> View this message in context: > >> >>>>> >> http://www.nabble.com/RFC%3A-ZendX_Doctrine-tp23454552p23455034.html > >> >>>>> Sent from the Zend Framework mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> > > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/RFC%3A-ZendX_Doctrine-tp23454552p23512561.html Sent from the Zend Framework mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
