Re: want to discuss - mvc extension

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Alexey Zakhlestin <indeyets@gmail.com>wrote: > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Nathan Nobbe<quickshiftin@gmail.com> > wrote: > > hi everyone, > > a couple of months back, i posted about my work on a native port of > pureMVC. > > > > http://marc.info/?l=pecl-dev&m=124279565212236&w=2 > > > > nobody said anything, which i took to mean nobody on this list values the > > idea of having native mvc classes in a php extension.. > > > > first off, please correct me if i'm wrong. secondly, i would like to > know, > > if you think this extension is useless, then please tell me why. i think > > ive earned that much by spending the time to make it work, and thoroughly > > testing it. > > > > as well i should mention the extension adds additional classes, besides > > Model, View, and Controller, such as a set of observer classes, which > unlike > > the spl, allow passing of data with the notification call, which some > people > > definitely prefer over the pull paradigm spl exposes. think of > javascript > > for example.. > > > > ive seen a number of extension proposals prior to and since mine, get > > accepted essentially, immediately. i think they're all getting accepted, > > because they all are just php wrappers for C libraries. but as you well > > know, there are tons of possibilities for extensions beyond the realm of > C > > library wrappers.., and i think an mvc is one of them. i also think its > > only fair that my extension be considered, if not accepted since it is > the > > first such (mvc) extension proposed; and ive chosen a standardized > (pureMVC) > > library for the implementation. > > > > i hate to whine, but i put a lot of time into this so far and i really > want > > to keep going. though not getting the endorsement as an accepted pecl > > extension will really limit any acceptance level of the project, if i > were > > to speculate.. i tried to ask what other options i have as far as > > leveraging the pecl client w/o having my code on pecl.php.net, but > nobody > > wanted to throw me a bone..; either way though, id rather have the code > on > > pecl.php.net than some other box, which people would have to pecl > > channel-add for some other domain. > > > > thanks for listening, and again, im looking forward to your response, > > I don't see any reason not to have this extension in pecl :-) > you can use "puremvc" as the name. wow, awesome! I take it for granted, that you are using "PHP License" for the code. i put the copyright for the pureMVC manifold (since although ive not taken any code, i have reused the PureMVC design), and beneath that, the BSD license. if you think the php license is a better choice, i suppose now would be a better time to switch it than any.., what advantages to the bsd license do you see the php license having. the only thing i know is that its the most 'compatible' w/ the php project, however, im not sure what incompatibilities the bsd license has w/ the php project. could you perhaps enlighten me a bit ? > Would be great, if you could post full snapshot of sources for review. ive uploaded the source to github, since thats what im using to version the code myself. and before a flame war starts, im more than happy to drop the code into svn to host here :D http://github.com/quickshiftin/PureMVC-ext/tree/master Do you have svn account? pecl account? > If not, you should apply for those i applied for these earlier today, w/ the username quickshiftin. thx, -nathan