Henrik Bechmann wrote: > But I believe the next step is to stop supporting PHP4, by which I mean, > transition more to the OOP features of the language, eventually exclusively. Pm has frequently expressed the opinion that OO is not likely to be in PmWiki's future. [1]
> You ask if there is a problem that you cannot see that requires > migration to OOP. Have you tried to follow the PmWiki code? With the > greatest respect for Patrick, it falls into all the traps available to > structured programming, I agree, the code is hard to follow, particularly for those new to PHP, so added clarity would be nice. However, I don't see that a move to OO specifically would do that. Clarity can be added in a non-OO fashion as well. > Another benefit of a re-write, not to be dismissed, is that it is an A re-write is a large under-taking. Whilst I agree it would be good to move PmWiki forward, I don't think a rewrite is where we should go first. > Support for customizable, configurable > form based entry would IMO radically expand the potential user base of > PmWiki, and owing to the very work that you reference, this feature is > relatively accessible, but requires further development effort. PmForms is probably 90% where we need to be. There's not too much missing. > PmWiki is most certainly a laggard by now. The current version has been > in beta for far too long That does not make PmWiki a laggard -- it's features are fairly competitive. Development however is certainly lagging. Perhaps this is simply semantics. > In any case, surely as a product matures, if it is to become established > in the long term, it requires an active community of developers to > sustain it (for the core!). Agreed. [1] http://www.pmichaud.com/pipermail/pmwiki-users/2005-December/020912.html ~ ~ Dave _______________________________________________ pmwiki-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/pmwiki-users
