2009/10/30 Matthew Weier O'Phinney <matt...@zend.com>: > -- keith Pope <mute.p...@googlemail.com> wrote > (on Friday, 30 October 2009, 04:02 PM +0000): >> 2009/10/30 Ralph Schindler <ralph.schind...@zend.com> : >> > > Time to go back to using Doctrine then :( bye bye nice models..... >> > > >> > > Do you think it would be a good idea to update the Quickstart guide >> > > now to not use the Data Mapper pattern and use doctrine instead? >> > >> > I would strongly disagree with that move. I think ZF has always offered 2 >> > solid solutions to modeling: use our Data classes (Table Row, etc) to build >> > out a proper model, OR use a 3rd Party ORM framework- like Doctrine. >> > >> > At ZendCon, i've heard more than one person say "This is the way modeling >> > should be done" after seeing matthew's talk on >> > >> > http://www.slideshare.net/weierophinney/architecting-your-models >> > >> > If a project doesn't have the resources to model their data like that, or >> > they need to leverage the Doctrine ecosystem to get a project done in time. >> > But in the most ideal world (where resources are not an issue), I too >> > think that this presentation shows how things should be done. >> > >> > That said, I think the quickstart should show both options, but focus on >> > the >> > Data Mapper, Service Layer stuff. >> >> I agree that the data mapper is a good way to do Models etc but I >> think the basic mapper shown in the quickstart does lead people into >> trouble. If a newcomer follows the quickstart they soon find out that >> modeling relations is very hard and they need an ORM...If we had >> Doctrine 2 integration we can then show the data mapper pattern at its >> best IMO. >> >> I have had this concern with the quickstart for a while :) > > I think we can show the current data mapper still, but then have a note > detailing ORMs and when you need to start using one (vs. a simple > hand-written data mapper).
Yeah I think thats all thats needed, the only reason I raised it was that I have been asked a couple of times about the quickstart :) > >> Also will we be deprecating Zend_Db as if we have tight Doctrine >> integration is there any reason to keep Zend_Db? > > There are plenty of reasons to keep Zend_Db. Not everyone will be using > Doctrine, and for many one-off types of applications (single tables, or > multiple tables with no relations, etc.), having Zend_Db around will > continue to be essential. Additionally, one aspect I'd like to explore > with the Doctrine folks is potentially allowing Zend_Db adapters as > Doctrine RDBMS adapters; this would provide some very interesting > integration points. Sounds interesting I look forward to seeing this initiative develop further, I would be happy to help in any way I can :) Once we have the integration especially with doctrine 2 would there be any further plans to look at things like dependency injection, criteria objects and repositories or any other DDD tools? To me having a full suite of tools like this would be a great long term goal? > > -- > Matthew Weier O'Phinney > Project Lead | matt...@zend.com > Zend Framework | http://framework.zend.com/ > -- ------------ http://www.thepopeisdead.com
