p. Wow, after 2 weeks of steady growth and activity, the mailing list traffic took a pause early this week. It looked like I was going to get a vacation but apparently last night everybody discovered the “Send” button and things kinda got out of hand. C’mon people, help me out here, I get paid by the word on these things. Post often, daddy needs a new Mac!
p. First, the part that everybody waits for, the one-liner of the week. In the thread “Question about the state of framework”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00086.html Matthew Ratzloff quips:
bq. To the developers who haven’t yet upgraded, note that Web 2.0.1 only upgrades the Clueless_Management_Buzzword package and should therefore be considered an optional upgrade.
p. I know we’ll all be sad to hear that upon reading this, Matthew’s boss decided that maybe a promotion wasn’t in his future.
p. Ok, that’s out of the way. Here’s what people were talking about this week on the framework mailing list.
* Spilling over from last week’s roundup, the discussion on Jim Weir’s proposal on an “AJAX extension”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00090.html continued. Davey Shafik made some great observations in his response. He sums up the XML vs. JSON debate quite nicely with this quote.
bq. Finally, JSON is just a much more effective method of transferring data, being of much less bulk, and natively supported by JS, rather than requiring extensive parsing using the DOM.
* Authorization and Access Control Lists were again hot topics this week with no less than 3 discussion threads on this topic. “Auth and ACL Plugin”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00007.html ran on from last week with Richard Thomas proposing and defending his idea of “a bit system” of flags. Interesting read and he publishes some sample code for developers to get their head around.
* The “Access control” thread was started by Matt to propose a KISS approach to Access Control. His approach tied user groups to controllers and actions in a way that even I can understand. He informally proposes (more on formal proposals later) a Zend_ACL class to handle the grunt work.
* “Zend_Registry”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00006.html popped up again when Art Hundiak proposed that the registry functions be moved to a Zend_Registry class. Mike responded by saying that he and the Development team discussed it and the consensus they reached was that the functions should stay where they are. He went on to say:
bq. However, we are all in agreement that the Zend class should not become a “catch all”. If it grows significantly we will look at separating it again.
* Nico Edtinger (who gets mentioned each week mainly because he “promotes my weekly roundups on the mailing list”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00059.html.) continued his monologue on his Zend_Mail_Class_Thingy in the short-lived thread “auto configuration for mail reading classes”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00011.html. From his description of the class, the only thing it won’t do is automatically respond to spammers for you. (Nico, can we get a Zend_Mail_Class_Thingy::sthu($emailAddress)? Hey, I could use that for my mother-in-law as well!)
* It looks like the Japanese translation of the documentation will soon be available for checkout. TAKAGI Masahiro posted ” Japanese translation of documentation”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00129.html late this week.
* Proposals were a hot topic this week with no less than 4 formal and a couple of informal proposals coming in. Jeffry Sambells started things off for us with “Zend Encryption class?”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00009.html. The Ralph Schindler chimed in with “Zend_Session Proposal – Feedback Please”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00016.html While not in the official format, Richard Thomas submitted “Permissions/ACL”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00049.html (Richard, here’s a hint, obfuscate with verbosity. Your concise and example riddled proposals are way too easy to read and nobody will take them seriously.) Jim Weir formalizes last weeks AJAX discussion with a proposal in the thread “Zend_SimpleAjax – soliciting your feedback”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00090.html. Andries Seutens submitted “Proposal: Zend_Tree”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00096.html (discussed below) Alexandre Riveira sent in “proposal: Zend_View_Layout feedback plis”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00101.html. Calvin Liu rounded out the week for us with “Proposal: Zend_Queue”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00144.html. That’s a *lot* of proposals people!
* All the proposals are worthy of discussion but few generated as much discussion as Andries Seutens’ “Proposal: Zend_Tree”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00096.html. There seemed to be some early confusion on this proposal and how it differs from a DOM. Finally Casper Langemeijer submitted an explanation that put everything in perspective. He explains a bit and points people to a tutorial that helps clarify the concepts behind the Zend_Tree proposal. (Warning: Off-site link. Save it, don’t click it yet. Finish reading this before you start something else. As good as it is, the tutorial just isn’t as interesting as what you are reading right now.)
bq. For storing trees in a sql database please read up on http://www.sitepoint.com/article/hierarchical-data-database/ and save alot of people from performance problems.
* Dirk Olbertz unintentionally opened a can of worms when he posted “WebServices: Server & Client”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00143.html. It was actually a good question and Dirk deserved props for asking, even if he is a little premature. Markus Wolf “responded”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00150.html with what he labeled as a <RANT> but what I relabled as <div class=”GOOD_ADVICE” style=”POLITE_BUT_FIRM”>. Markus brings out some good points about all the proposals that have hit the list this week. I’d summarize for you but I don’t think I could do it justice so I’ll just do my usual pull-quote.
bq. Why on earth constantly reinvent the wheel and put classes that already exist in other repositories, like PEAR or eZ components, and reimplement them for the ZF “just to have them in the Zend Framework” ????
Maybe something to do with having clean IP, consistency, robustness, and a well tested code base? Nah! Actually, everything and the kitchen sink would be a bit crowded. Keep it balanced people!
* Finally, Michael Saharov started “Authentication in Zend Fm”:http://www.zend.com/lists/fw-general/200604/msg00145.html. Tom Wickert posted a real nice response to Michael’s question including a short HOWTO on getting HTTP authentication working in the framework. He includes code and explanations on how to implement. Good job Tom!
p. That’s it for this week. You’ve been a great audience! I’ll be here all week!