On Apr 21, 3:37 pm, Eno <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2009, Lawrence Krubner wrote:
> > In fact, the whole site is working. We've successfully upgraded from
> > Symfony 1.1 to 1.2.
>
> > I'll say again, the upgrade is much harder than what I'd expect from a
> > small increment number upgrade.
>
> If you followed the history, you'd know that 1.1 was a complete re-factor
> with a new forms framework and 1.2 changed a lot of configuration and
> routing too. Some people have said 1.2 should have been 2.0 :-)
Well, thanks, but "followed the history" is a lot to ask. There is
already so much to learn, without going back a few years to get the
full historical perspective.
All the same, I agree about the "2.0" label. A lot of config files
changed, which is one of the things a major upgrade number would
normally be based on.
And after all, what is the point of using a framework? Clients, and
web design firms, prefer frameworks for their long term stability.
Otherwise we'd all simply be writing our own ad-hoc code.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"symfony users" 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-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
