Zend PHP Framework Coming Soon ...

[JaredWhite]

Just a thought: it sounds like this Zend Framework is not so much a "complete system" like many of the existing PHP frameworks, but rather it is a collection of small, self-contained classes to abstract some common Web site development gruntwork. If that is the case, then I submit to you that it could be possible to build more elaborate, "site-in-a-box" frameworks on top of the Zend Framework. That would be cool. The flip side to this is that this framework is starting to sound a bit like a competitor to some PEAR classes, which I suspected from the get-go. I wonder how that idea sits with people?

Jared

[Dr Livingston]

Sits pretty well with me in fact. The quicker we see the end of PEAR and it's institutionalisation, the better. It wasn't upto much anyways, and from my point of view, is PHP4.yuk anyways.

We don't need it anymore, not that we needed it in the first place that is.

[jayboots]

Nice to see Wez provide some details but disappointing to see him use an argument that reminds of SCO-like FUD on the FOSS community. I appreciate his point about having a development process and "clean IP", but I cringe at the idea that code outside of the Zend framework is potentially already "contaminated" -- to the point where none of it can be trusted.

Will Zend be offering indemnification? Are they looking for copyright attribution from contributors so that they can dual-license? I do think they are capable of a technically sound solution; otoh, I am concerned about the community process and licensing issues.

Even before code, I think the first thing they should release is their license agreement and the official procedures and rules -- and that they should release these sooner than later. It sounds like they want to create a community based process yet there doesn't seem to be any *open* contact with the community at this point.

[Selkirk]

I find the focus on the license curious, too. Why didn't they take care of this before the announcement? How long have they been planning this? Its probably just over-zealous lawyers preserving their options. Yet, I get a whiff of something else. Not sure if its FUD or just lack of preparation.

[arborint]

Clean IP, Extreme Simplicity, and all the other buzz words really don't matter. For me the most important question is: are there smart, even visionary, people designing and building the thing? There is no replacement for excellent design.

I don't see much vision and get more a sense of "Oh Sh*t! Rails and AJAX! Rails and AJAX! We better do our own framework!"

[McGruff]

I don't know. I'm going to sound obsessive but I think tests are a promising sign of sophistication (although its phpUnit not SimpleTest ).

[JaredWhite]

Good call, McGruff, I like SimpleTest much better also. Oh well -- better PHPUnit than nothing at all.

[dagfinn]

Clean IP, Extreme Simplicity, and all the other buzz words really don't matter. For me the most important question is: are there smart, even visionary, people designing and building the thing? There is no replacement for excellent design.

I don't see much vision and get more a sense of "Oh Sh*t! Rails and AJAX! Rails and AJAX! We better do our own framework!"

I'm hopeful anyway if the do manage to make it a component library rather than one of those all-or-nothing frameworks. The chances that at least some of it will be useful are pretty good.

[dagfinn]

Good call, McGruff, I like SimpleTest much better also. Oh well -- better PHPUnit than nothing at all.

PHPUnit is fine. I even got it to work after conversing with Sebastian Bergmann for a while on the simpletest-support mailing list. (What a great forum for learning about PHPUnit )

Seriously, the choice of test framework is not the critical factor. The fact that they're using one, and theiir skill in using it is more important.

[mx2k]

i'm wondering about the template view. are they going to use tags similar to <jsp:something> <asp:something> or use a smarty or ruby like syntax.

i'd prefer tags since its easier on designers and does not require to touch code in order for the tags to do something. not to mention tags are usually something that you could easily add to any html editor/ or ide that handles HTML tags.

And i know they said they required no configuration files for the framework but a configuration class would be handy that you could use native php, .ini files, or xml .cfg file or something. (which would compile the xml or ini into a php file with a timestamp to keep from parsing it each time, i know myself and others already do this to some degree) that way its already abstracted and you can pull from a global singleton instance.

I don't know. I'm going to sound obsessive but I think tests are a promising sign of sophistication (although its phpUnit not SimpleTest ).

and Mcgruff, tests are a great thing, but do not let them imply sophistication. While I do admire you're overzealousness for testing, tests can be poorly written, code, while tested, could be poorly designed for extensibility, and unit testing is only one form of testing. There are other things like performance, usablity, extensibilty that should be tested as well.

and even though i understand too many cooks in the kitchen spoils the broth as wez said, but I still think IMHO, that they should be a little more open into letting the community help or at least post code to the community and take in suggestions.

This does sound last minute and rushed.

maybe they've been reading all the sitepoint threads secretly

[dagfinn]

and Mcgruff, tests are a great thing, but do not let them imply sophistication. While I do admire you're overzealousness for testing, tests can be poorly written, code, while tested, could be poorly designed for extensibility, and unit testing is only one form of testing. There are other things like performance, usablity, extensibilty that should be tested as well.

Tests can be used in different ways. But if you follow the agile principles, test first and refactor mercilessly, I would say that practically guarantees better design.

[PHPCamp.com]

I have always admired Zend's willingness to do the unthinkable, trying to balance open source development's commercial aspects with the ideology of the open or free source movements.

I remember a meeting I had with the President of Zend at an open source conference in san jose, I forget the date but it was a few years ago. It was right before they released their PHP Encoder tool. He asked me what I'd like to see from Zend and I said that what PHP needed was a commercial leader. The developers of PHP weren't doing it, they all had day jobs and spoke at a conference or two each year.

My opinion was that for us developers and business owners to be taken seriously, there needed to be a, for lack of a better word, a behemouth driving PHP forward. If not, PHP would never emerge from the backroom and be relegated to cutesy stuff.

Here it is years later and they still take a beating for what they're trying to do. Not that it's unjustified. In fact they have confounded me several times but that's normal, imho.

For instance I'm trying to do something on the educational side with them, since several of the regular conference speakers work for them, and for one reason or another the ball got dropped. I contacted them again and now for us to be involved with each other I have to become a certified Zend trainer, have a training office with a heater and air conditioner, among other requirements, and buy a certain number of units (this was the only condition I agreed with).

I mention that to illustrate that they're at least trying something and they're going to hit bumps in the road and because they're the most public of the PHP commercial entities they are easy targets of criticism.

For me they, or someone like them, are necessary to move PHP into the future but it will come with some hiccups. In the end I'm glad they're around and I'll consider just about anything they present. The great thing is that PHP still gives you a choice of how you want to develop. Cheers.

[jayboots]

These comments shed light on the licensing issue -- and for the better, I think : http://andigutmans.blogspot.com/2005...o-long-so.html

[arborint]

These comments shed light on the licensing issue -- and for the better, I think : http://andigutmans.blogspot.com/2005...o-long-so.html

A couple of interesting tidbits. The company 100days is mentioned as the other developer with Zend. They are mostly a Java/JBoss shop from the little that I have read about them in the past. He also notes that they have "our design principles" but doesn't say what they are unfortunately. He does say it will be an MVC framework or at least provide support for MVC.

[P.H.P]

I dont know why i have a strong feel about the End Of PHP , not End exactly but loosing a great amount of Web Development Market !

[mx2k]

Tests can be used in different ways. But if you follow the agile principles, test first and refactor mercilessly, I would say that practically guarantees better design.

i am not disagreeing, but i am a surpreme realist. and the keyword here is "if" you follow. which again is not always the case. hope for the best, but expect the worst. a paradox to be sure.

[Carl]

Why does doing a configuration file in ASP.NETseem like brain surgery but In Ruby on Rails it just goes? I think that Zend is chickening out on actually making something that is simple in usage but powerful.

I don't want to use a framework that when another developer decides to start hacking into my code I can't tell what is what because the framework allows them to use crazy twists on something that should be controlled. So if it is not MVC and allow "flexibility" I don't want to have anything to with it.

Dumping PEAR is a good idea as I have expressed previously that the reason that Perl is being held back is because of a giant-sized dependacy on the CPAN library. Libraries written outside of the installation of a scripting language become a crutch and ball and chain. This is one good thing about .NET. PEAR should be killed and further development of built-in libraries like PDO should be instituted. I don't care if PHP becomes 100 mb large as long as I don't have to deal with the constant lack of development because of non-synchronisation of outside projects.

[BartVB]

Interesting developments, interesting times. Not going to be that useful for me (lack of PHP4) support for most of my projects but it's good to see that they are trying to get a decent framework of the ground. The current frameworks situation is one big mess, CakePHP looks like one of very few exceptions to that. It seems like Zend is creating just another one of those. The main advantage of that is that it's Zend behind it which will give it some guaranteed backing/continuity. Being an opensource guy myself I don't see many other advantages, rather see some disadvantages in Zend control.

I have to say that this:
http://netevil.org/node.php?nid=633

If you're a business that takes legal matters seriously, are you going to trust a bunch of guys that probably haven't even met each other in real-life to maintain clean IP, or a company backed by other PHP related businesses?

kind of ticked me off. Elitist FUD blabla. 'Come to us, it's warm and cozy over here. Our lawyers will give you a foot massage'. *brr*

I'm thoroughly and utterly fed up with the 'sue them' mentality in the US. The legal system over there went WAY out of hand. Pretty insane and very, very counter productive. Bah. The worst thing is that the rest of the world is suffering because of that

Anyway. If you ask me Zend isn't making friends in the opensource corner (which made PHP big in the first place). It sounds really sounds like, 'ah, it was fun playing with you in the sandbox but we're going to play with the big boys now to cash in'. That's probably a bit too cynical but you get my drift We'll see where this thing goes...

[a.dotty.dot]

Sadly, on an XP mailing list I subscribe to whenever PHP is brought up the jokes begin.

In most cases, people who scoff at PHP don't know very much about PHP. Since a developer's choice of language tends to be a touchy - almost religious - issue, I usually let them wallow in their own ignorance and move on.