>SensioLabs is not the devil, obviously, it's simply your main competitor. >It's a pity that you decided to reinvent the wheel, met a 'little blockade', >resigned and decided to go for Doctrine on this failure. You could have >started by providing integration to the popular Doctrine, then have a look >to the Xyster Orm. So, as i said, it's a pity, that you failed this way. If >i were SensioLabs, >http://www.doctrine-project.org/documentation/manual/2_0/en/pdf i would rub >my hands.
Either you're a troll or you're misinformed... You keep referring to a "failure" but leave it unspecified - Benjamin made a decision that writing Zend_Entity et al. was simply not possible at this time. He was the sole developer and had no assistance. I also have never heard of Xyster - so it would have been a surprise to see it adopted. SensioLabs may be rubbing their hands for some reason, but not because our adoption of Doctrine assists Symfony. Developers have been using Doctrine with the Zend Framework since forever. The only thing that has changed is making its integration a formal development goal. In my mind that is a success given Doctrine's popularity that will actually do the opposite of what you seem to suspect. I could say the same for other forms of integration. Symfony has an advantage in that it bundles third party libraries while ZF reinvents them or misses the features they offer (sometimes not for the better). Maybe the integration of Doctrine will prompt a look at what else has been missing - YAML, HTML filtering, etc. Paddy Pádraic Brady http://blog.astrumfutura.com http://www.survivethedeepend.com OpenID Europe Foundation Irish Representative ________________________________ From: Arié Bénichou <arie.benic...@gmail.com> To: fw-general@lists.zend.com Sent: Wed, November 25, 2009 10:08:39 AM Subject: Re: [fw-general] Discontinuing Zend Entity in favour of Doctrine integration Hi, drm-4 wrote: > > If you'd like integration for Xyster, write a proposal for it. > Please Gerard, don't tell me what i'm supposed to do. You don't get the point here, the question is : why did'nt you use Xyster ORM? drm-4 wrote: > > And Sensio is the devil...? What's your point? Let alone the fact that > Doctrine is simply open source (LGPL) and whatever company would be > behind it wouldn't make any difference? Also, check your facts, because > what you say isn't even true. > SensioLabs is not the devil, obviously, it's simply your main competitor. It's a pity that you decided to reinvent the wheel, met a 'little blockade', resigned and decided to go for Doctrine on this failure. You could have started by providing integration to the popular Doctrine, then have a look to the Xyster Orm. So, as i said, it's a pity, that you failed this way. If i were SensioLabs, http://www.doctrine-project.org/documentation/manual/2_0/en/pdf i would rub my hands . So, i will ask my question again : why did'nt you use Xyster ORM? -Arié -- View this message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/Discontinuing-Zend-Entity-in-favour-of-Doctrine-integration-tp648011p787423.html Sent from the Zend Framework mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
