As with any Open-Source software, there is no definitive deadline for symfony 1.1 but I will try hard to have a first beta by the end of August.
I think we need to bundle a default ORM with symfony. I don't want to force user to install a plugin as a first step to begin for every new project. I also want to have only 1 "preferred" ORM for symfony. It's much easier to update documentation, tutorials, ... The way Propel is bundled in symfony since 1.0 is pretty much a plugin (thanks to chtito work). All files are in a single addon/propel directory (+ Propel itself in vendor/propel). As far as form/validation is concerned, we need to make some more changes in the core before it can happen. The view and sfExecutionFilter refactoring, ... are first steps to be able to implement the new form/validation system. Next step will be to convert helpers to classes/objects. As a side note, I'm always looking for people willing to help. Everybody can help in a lot of different areas: answering questions on the ML and the forum, writing documentation, writing plugins, ... But we also need more people willing to help for small things. For example, there is a lot of opened tickets that need some attention. A lot of them are very simple tickets. If someone can create a patch, write some tests and update the documentation, it will speed up inclusion in the framework greatly. Fabien eric williams wrote: > I didn't mean to imply that i hoped/expected doctrine to be released > with symfony 1.1, unless symfony 1.1 was, say, 4 months away! lsmith's > characterization of doctrine is pretty accurate. > > i've never heard any sort of timeframe for sf 1.1. it seems that UJS/PJS > are still alpha, and i havent seen anything on the greatly-anticipated > form/validation overhaul. not to put you on the spot, Fabien, but do you > have a rough goal in mind for the release of sf 1.1 if things go > according to plan? > > and definitely +1 for matthias' idea, something that would be nice for > 1.1 (very few changes need to be made, chtito did most of the work a > while ago). then symfony 1.1 could just be bundled with sfPropelPlugin > as the "official" ORM. > > cheers, > -eric > > Matthias N. wrote: >> On 16 Jul., 09:52, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Fabien POTENCIER wrote: >>>> As far as Doctrine is concerned, we won't be able to package it with >>>> symfony 1.1 because: >>>> - It requires php 5.2 >>>> - It is under major refactoring as of now >>> I think symfony 1.1 should do PHP 5.1. symfony 1.2 should consider 5.2. >>> BTW: The goal is to have a stable doctrine release towards the end of >>> the summer. At this point doctrine will become much more feasible, but >>> will still not be as bug free as one would really hope. So targeting >>> doctrine's inclusion for symfony 1.2 seems like the most realistic >>> target for now. >> IMHO Doctrine doesn't need to be bundled with symfony. But Propel >> should be completely _unbundled_ into a sfPropelPlugin like it is >> already the case with Doctrine. This would fit best to the concept of >> "independent from ORM / DBAL". Bundling both ORMs doesn't make sense. >> >> Regards, >> Matthias > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "symfony developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/symfony-devs?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
