Login | Register
My pages Projects Community openCollabNet

Discussions > dev > Re: [propel-dev] roadmap > Reply to message

propel
Reply to message

* = Required fields
* Subject
* Body
Attachments
Send reply to
Topic
Author (directly in email)
Please type the letters in the image above.

Original message

Author hlellelid
Full name Hans Lellelid
Date 2006-03-28 09:25:10 PST
Message David Z├╝lke wrote:
>> Adding the pages sounds good to me. The only concern I have (which I
>> can mention in comments on wiki too) is that certain methods (temporal
>> methods) take additional parameters -- which might present a problem
>> __call/__get/__set, unless we just standardize on an API that does not
>> support these. Just something to discuss.
>
> No problem IMHO, call_user_func_array() is our friend.
>
>> We may also want to have the "lightweight" OM classes be an option.
>> It'd be nice to have several different options for types of classes to
>> generate, but I also recognize that these would have to be maintained :)
>
> _Having_ them would be easy, but you're right, maintaining them would be
> the real issue ;)
>
> I added 4, 5 and 6 to the "known priorities". Or shall I move them to
> the second list. What exactly is the difference anyway? ;)

Yeah, I don't know :) I think the first list is stuff we've discussed &
sort of resolved to add, whereas the second list is stuff that has been
requested & that might need a bit more discussion before we actually sit
down & write task tickets.

(I guess that means that we can sit down & write task tickets for the
first part of the list.)

Hans