General Category > Looking towards 2.0

Just a thought

<< < (2/4) > >>

nukpana:
Ideally, yes.  Maintain simplicity, expandability and ease of use for all users/developers (front and backend).  If I recall is originally what Luka wanted - a central repository for mods to be installed through the admin from snewscms.com. This will help sNews devs to maintain an API that never changes for any version, devs to write mods that don't have to worry about the base code changing from release to release and users that can expect not reimplementing the same mods or bugging people to rewrite for the newer version.

Now, will a 1.8 version come close? Yes, but it will still fail. If more than 50% of users want a modular/plugin system then a 1.8 that doesn't allow this will automatically fail because it is not what the users want and since the structure will change (again) none of the mods will be compatible making a 1.8 version more of a failure.  The code presented already is a way of optimizing from 1.7 but in thinking, should a 1.8 version even be done?

Keyrocks:

--- Quote from: nukpana on February 01, 2010, 02:53:10 AM ---If more than 50% of users want a modular/plugin system then a 1.8 that doesn't allow this will automatically fail because it is not what the users want and since the structure will change (again) none of the mods will be compatible making a 1.8 version more of a failure.  The code presented already is a way of optimizing from 1.7 but in thinking, should a 1.8 version even be done?
--- End quote ---

This is a good question, the same one I had a whole back when we first considered starting on a 1.8 project... because I really didn't see it as being a practical exercise if there were not 'vivible' improvements to sNews. I figure that if Users don't actually see and experience new improvements that make using sNews more convenient... and they have to go through precarious database changes to keep their existing data intact, then they won't be interested in moving up to the next version. They will simply keep running with what they have because it's working.

For these reasons, I've always figured it would be better to focus on building sNews 2.0 and leave the current platform behind as it is.


--- Quote from: nukpana on February 01, 2010, 02:53:10 AM ---Ideally, yes.  Maintain simplicity, expandability and ease of use for all users/developers (front and backend).  If I recall is originally what Luka wanted - a central repository for mods to be installed through the admin from snewscms.com.
--- End quote ---

The main reason we haven't been able to start on sNews 2.0 is, of course, because Luka took the lead on it last year and was going to provide us with a new core to work from. As it stands, Luka is not able to provide us with that. So... (without being negative towards Luka) I think we should get used to the fact that sNews 2.0 will never materialize unless someone else develops the new core upon which sNews 2.0 will grow and prosper.


--- Quote from: nukpana on February 01, 2010, 02:53:10 AM ---This will help sNews devs to maintain an API that never changes for any version, devs to write mods that don't have to worry about the base code changing from release to release and users that can expect not reimplementing the same mods or bugging people to rewrite for the newer version.
--- End quote ---

I agree. However, developing an Application Programming Interface (API) is no simple task. We're talking about building a Platform... consisting of several complete applications. When I think of applications in the sNews 2.0 Platform... I'm thinking the Platform must be exapandable so that it could - in time - have up to five applications (engines) for (1) blogs, (2) news (articles system), (3) files management, (4) photo galleries and (eventually) (5) a simple yet flexible forums system... all available with one installation. The first three would essentially provide the same general functionality as sNews 1.6 & 1.7 have (with some improvements), and the last two would add versatility.

A good API system might also include a Theming system (with panels to change text, background colors, add background images to header, body and footer, etc), a Membership system, and maybe even a Mail Gateway with mail list support. And the Files Management engine would provide a centralized way to upload and store several types of files... but it might also provide an easy way to attache files in all content.

Moving to a Platform like this would require a significant change in our (collective) philosophy or 'Guidelines' in terms of what sNews would be. Developing a true API would require a lot more code that we are used to having. Before even starting, there needs to be a lot of thought put into what core features would be included. And it will need a superior tagging system that pulls it all together.

I don't know about you, but all of this is above my level of capability.  :)

nukpana:
Well, it is a wonder why I pursued the 1.8 version since most of the team decided for 2.0 anyway.  If I recall someone (Joost maybe?) noted that 2.0 may not be accomplished with this team and to focus on 1.8 - voice of reason I don't know.  


--- Quote ---this would require a significant change in our (collective) philosophy or 'Guidelines' in terms of what sNews would be. Developing a true API would require a lot more code that we are used to having. Before even starting, there needs to be a lot of thought put into what core features would be included.
--- End quote ---

It wouldn't have to be more code, it would be less code and structured. A few functions and maybe a few classes (yes OOP - re-read what is being said and read this and tell me as a platform, as you call it, this wouldn't be a additional solution?).  

--- Quote ---sNews is a simple, basic, customizable CMS tool suitable for developers with beginner-to-advanced PHP skills.
--- End quote ---

How I read this, it is a tool, not a complete CMS for PHP developers. If part of that spec is to cater to front end developers as well, then the core shouldn't output (almost) any HTML so front end devs can customize the outputted content as they see fit.

What sNews would be, based on the above, wouldn't change.  The how-to changes.

Bob said it best here: sNews is a base to build upon.
(I must note I do disagree about OOP statement. Bob, your knowledge and expertise could help define 2.0 better as a core moving forward.)

Simple. Let's not overcomplicate things.

Core features (if you want) would be simple - Pages, Login, Plugins, Templates (, Extras maybe).


--- Quote ---We're talking about building a Platform... consisting of several complete applications
--- End quote ---
In the bigger picture, perhaps. But you have to start small to get to that level.  We can't start sprinting before we walk out of the house.

Keyrocks:

--- Quote from: nukpana on February 02, 2010, 01:17:04 PM ---It wouldn't have to be more code, it would be less code and structured. A few functions and maybe a few classes (yes OOP - re-read what is being said and read this and tell me as a platform, as you call it, this wouldn't be a additional solution?).
--- End quote ---
 

What Joost decribes here is the approach used by numerous well-matured application development firms, particularly those that build ASP.NET products, such as Telligent (I'm currently working with their CS2008.5 SP2 product for a national client). As a developer, you never get to see the actual core engine code but you get to work at the 'Junior' level... using their custom tags which provide endless configuration possibilities.


--- Quote from: nukpana on February 02, 2010, 01:17:04 PM ---
--- Quote ---sNews is a simple, basic, customizable CMS tool suitable for developers with beginner-to-advanced PHP skills.
--- End quote ---

How I read this, it is a tool, not a complete CMS for PHP developers. If part of that spec is to cater to front end developers as well, then the core shouldn't output (almost) any HTML so front end devs can customize the outputted content as they see fit.
What sNews would be, based on the above, wouldn't change.  The how-to changes.
--- End quote ---

That "Quote" kind of evolved over a period of time starting with an original statement I tossed into the mix when we were first creating the content for snewscms.com (before it went public). It was stated for one purpose only... to advise visitors that they ought to have beginner-to-advanced PHP skills before taking the plunge with sNews as a website engine. It was not meant to 'brand' sNews in any particular way for any particular market. Howver, note that it did say sNews is a "customizalbe CMS tool"... which means it is a CMS that we can use as a tool to build a more versatile CMS. Maybe "tool" was not the best word to use.

bakercad:

--- Quote from: nukpana on February 02, 2010, 01:17:04 PM ---Bob said it best here: sNews is a base to build upon.
(I must note I do disagree about OOP statement. Bob, your knowledge and expertise could help define 2.0 better as a core moving forward.)
--- End quote ---

The only reason I don't think OOP would be a good option for sNews is to maintain simplicity for developers with beginner PHP skills.  If we want to forgo the concern of keeping the code simple for beginners, then I'm all for using OOP.

Also, like I said before.  I'll do what I can to help out with 2.0, but I can't make guarantees with how much I can get involved.  I'd love to just hope in & go, but I can't commit to that.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page