1
Hi,
I joined xoops.org after reading this Roadmap. Wow you got many good comments for this, not bad.
My first impression was, uhh a 7 tier architecture, ok why not. But after a closer look it seems to be more a design diagram.
After reading :
> - Developers will have a consistent and expectable platform to build on, with libraries to help them build any type of Web-based application, not just “XOOPS modules”.
Yes ... this version will be more than a simple CMS system ... and maybe fulfill my requirements :).
I like to have a system where you can edit content as simple as in a wiki or manage several group tasks.
Maybe support single sign on (Liberty Alliance), handle digital keys (signed mails is the only real spam protection) and so on.
Here some comments to the layer:
Exxos
I am not sure if i understand everything but I think idea with the configurations is realy good.
Seems for like a kind of IOC () for configuration parameters, isn't it?
XOOPS kernel
Looks like we will get some nice functions which i missed until now.
Maybe the kernel can handle dependencies between modules/application and create the required objects (maybe this is planned).
Many frameworks using IOC to dissolve dependencies between modules or even classes or managing modules on kernel level (e.g. OSGI).
Another key function of many frameworks is the support of transactions is it not required?
XoopsData/XoopsDb
I like this approach to have a interface for data as a core service.
Another idea is to support versioning on system level. I think in the context of CMS this is very important that.
CoreServices
Maybe other core services could be:
* a notification repository/service ( is it not supported yet it the current system?) to be able of creating push services.
* a basic messaging service for the communication between application
* a time service (the time is different on the world - :) )
* an optional support of categories ( i think for almost all content objects categories should be assignable - like labels in gmail :) ) Maybe a category and a group is something similar!?!
System modules
What i did't like in the current version, there are so many "functions" in the system module but not all apps need all those functions.
I would prefer more separation not all kind of application need stuff like "avatars", "user ranks","comments" .....
Even groups or user should be a separate module.
The first think what i did, i got a snapshot from CVS for xoops4. May it is stupid but one of the first thinks to do is to define the
folder structure of the system and document this. In xoops2 the structure is not completely clear for me :).
I hope somebody is interested in my comments.
bye Steve
I joined xoops.org after reading this Roadmap. Wow you got many good comments for this, not bad.
My first impression was, uhh a 7 tier architecture, ok why not. But after a closer look it seems to be more a design diagram.
After reading :
> - Developers will have a consistent and expectable platform to build on, with libraries to help them build any type of Web-based application, not just “XOOPS modules”.
Yes ... this version will be more than a simple CMS system ... and maybe fulfill my requirements :).
I like to have a system where you can edit content as simple as in a wiki or manage several group tasks.
Maybe support single sign on (Liberty Alliance), handle digital keys (signed mails is the only real spam protection) and so on.
Here some comments to the layer:
Exxos
I am not sure if i understand everything but I think idea with the configurations is realy good.
Seems for like a kind of IOC () for configuration parameters, isn't it?
XOOPS kernel
Looks like we will get some nice functions which i missed until now.
Maybe the kernel can handle dependencies between modules/application and create the required objects (maybe this is planned).
Many frameworks using IOC to dissolve dependencies between modules or even classes or managing modules on kernel level (e.g. OSGI).
Another key function of many frameworks is the support of transactions is it not required?
XoopsData/XoopsDb
I like this approach to have a interface for data as a core service.
Another idea is to support versioning on system level. I think in the context of CMS this is very important that.
CoreServices
Maybe other core services could be:
* a notification repository/service ( is it not supported yet it the current system?) to be able of creating push services.
* a basic messaging service for the communication between application
* a time service (the time is different on the world - :) )
* an optional support of categories ( i think for almost all content objects categories should be assignable - like labels in gmail :) ) Maybe a category and a group is something similar!?!
System modules
What i did't like in the current version, there are so many "functions" in the system module but not all apps need all those functions.
I would prefer more separation not all kind of application need stuff like "avatars", "user ranks","comments" .....
Even groups or user should be a separate module.
The first think what i did, i got a snapshot from CVS for xoops4. May it is stupid but one of the first thinks to do is to define the
folder structure of the system and document this. In xoops2 the structure is not completely clear for me :).
I hope somebody is interested in my comments.
bye Steve
