Comments

  1. Hi Ryan,

    I’m interested in how you feel Cake was limited. In what ways did you find it delivered too little?

    Also, I’m not sure I understand how things were limited to “just index, add, delete and view”. What were you trying to achieve here that Cake couldn’t accommodate?

    October 25, 2009 at 4:44 pm |
  2. poLK:

    Ryan, I wish gwoo or nate come here to teach you how to implement more then baked crud actions. Join irc and ask, we’ll not help you to grow here.

    As of your php4/5 complains, I have nothing more to say then – CakePHP roadmap. PHP5 only version, full 5.3 support, namespaces, you’ll find everything there. Truth is that new project can move on forward much faster, because it is not held back by community. If CakePHP codebase follows fresh edge trends closely without backwards compatibility, you’ll have more reasons to cry for. Large community around CakePHP will not let this project die; therefore core developers owns to community some ‘sanity’ when going forward with core.

    As of ‘loss’, I’ll repeat something I said in CakePHP IRC channel yesterday: if anyone worries that CakePHP world have lost some brains and hands, then I assure you we have lost them a months ago, when they started this project (now named Lithium) and kept this development in secret for nearby half of core development team. Just checkout its timeline – you’ll find out exact date when we lost them. This double resignation just proves it, nothing more – and IMO should happen before last CakeFest, when existency of this code was discovered.

    In fact, it is everyone’s choice. I wish good success to Lithium; I found very sexy things in it. But I do prefer stable codebase with large community – over new project. Fact that it is driven by excellent ex-CakePHP core developers doesn’t make much difference to me.

    October 27, 2009 at 3:38 am |

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.