Quote from: OpenGeek at Jul 29, 2008, 10:29 AM
Quote from: sottwell at Jul 29, 2008, 08:36 AM
I’ll be quite honest here, I’m happy as a clam at high tide with Evolution. I’ve got some ideas for improvements on it. I just don’t have the energy and patience any more to struggle with trying to learn the alphabet soup underlying Revolution. I’ve spent some time on it, and I can see where it will be a wonderful tool for heavy-duty web designers. But I suspect that the simpler structure of Evolution will continue to suit small-to-medium sites for many years to come.
Hmmm, this really depresses me; makes me kind of feel like I’ve wasted the last 2 years of my life trying to take MODx to the next level, responding to all the complaints and experiences we’ve had with the legacy code. Revolution is supposed to be where these improvements come together; I just wish I could understand why everyone is so hesitant with it and refuses to get involved in the development. Alphabet soup? Really? The tags are easier to learn, the parser is more flexible and consistent, the API is more consistent (rather than different functions all over the place with no naming conventions), and manager customization is infinitely less painful (thank you Shaun). I would argue that Revolution is simpler, has less core code, is more extensible, and, well, maybe I just don’t get it.
I’m gonna go cry now... :’(
I’m actually looking forward to moving to Revolution. Having seen the code, it’s clear that it will be more robust than Evolution and much more extensible. I’m impressed by something new in Revolution almost every day.
That said, I also can relate to what Susan is saying. It’s not the tags or the parser or the API or even the fear of change (at least for me). Having started from scratch with both 0.9.6 and Revolution, I can say that Revolution is *much* harder to get a grip on. I’ve wandered around in the mostly uncommented code for hours with no idea what I was looking at or what it did or where to find what I wanted (and, yes, I’ve looked at the docs). I’ve written strictly OOP programs with thousands of lines of code, figured out the internal structure of an Excel spreadsheet file (before anyone had published it) by trial and error, and deconstructed uncommented assembly code, so I can only imagine how daunting Revolution looks to someone fairly new to OOP and/or PHP.
Just look at the nesting depth and taxonomy here :
core
model
modx
processors
layout
tree
element
schema
smarty
internals
modx
As a new user, I can guess what the core is, but I can’t imagine what a model is or what I would expect to find in any of the other levels except maybe element. The structure suggests that modx is a model and that a model is only one part of the core, but then why is there another modx under smarty, which appears to be another model? And isn’t the core part of MODx? Then why is modx in multiple places *under* the core??? And isn’t a model the same thing as a schema? And what the heck are these new "connectors"?? It’s enough to make you dizzy.
I’m not suggesting that these questions don’t have good answers, just that a new user is going to have a hard time finding them and that developers are going to be hesitant to join up to work on a system they don’t understand. I have no doubt that it all looks pretty simple to the people who built it--and maybe to the many people smarter than me.
Shaun’s new tutorials are great but I think at some point, somebody needs to explicate the MODx directory tree in plain English to explain what these things are and what they do.
I hope I don’t sound too negative here because I really love MODx and Revolution. I’m just trying to give my take on why developers aren’t jumping aboard right and left.