[pmwiki-users] Any hope for 2.2.0 stable release?

Henrik Bechmann henrik.bechmann at sympatico.ca
Thu Jan 15 00:05:46 CST 2009

Fair enough, we can agree to disagree on scope for now. Part of the 
community process I presume would be methodical consideration of 
alternatives as a planning process.

Anyone else think moving to a community development model would be a 
good move?


- Henrik

DaveG wrote:
> Henrik Bechmann wrote:
>> But I believe the next step is to stop supporting PHP4, by which I 
>> mean, transition more to the OOP features of the language, eventually 
>> exclusively.
> Pm has frequently expressed the opinion that OO is not likely to be in 
> PmWiki's future. [1]
>> You ask if there is a problem that you cannot see that requires 
>> migration to OOP. Have you tried to follow the PmWiki code? With the 
>> greatest respect for Patrick, it falls into all the traps available 
>> to structured programming,
> I agree, the code is hard to follow, particularly for those new to 
> PHP, so added clarity would be nice. However, I don't see that a move 
> to OO specifically would do that. Clarity can be added in a non-OO 
> fashion as well.
>> Another benefit of a re-write, not to be dismissed, is that it is an 
> A re-write is a large under-taking. Whilst I agree it would be good to 
> move PmWiki forward, I don't think a rewrite is where we should go first.
>> Support for customizable, configurable form based entry would IMO 
>> radically expand the potential user base of PmWiki, and owing to the 
>> very work that you reference, this feature is relatively accessible, 
>> but requires further development effort. 
> PmForms is probably 90% where we need to be. There's not too much 
> missing.
>> PmWiki is most certainly a laggard by now. The current version has 
>> been in beta for far too long 
> That does not make PmWiki a laggard -- it's features are fairly 
> competitive. Development however is certainly lagging. Perhaps this is 
> simply semantics.
>> In any case, surely as a product matures, if it is to become 
>> established in the long term, it requires an active community of 
>> developers to sustain it (for the core!).
> Agreed.
> [1] 
> http://www.pmichaud.com/pipermail/pmwiki-users/2005-December/020912.html
>  ~ ~ Dave


Henrik Bechmann

More information about the pmwiki-users mailing list