[RFC|Rejected] libmodx

These RFCs were either rejected or have been replaced by an alternative proposal. They will not be included in phpBB.
Post Reply
igorw
Registered User
Posts: 500
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 11:47 pm

[RFC|Rejected] libmodx

Post by igorw »

MODX Library

The MODX Library, libmodx for short, provides standard APIs and classes for working with MODs. It allows a shared code base and easier interaction between tools that handle MODs. Our existing tools (AutoMOD, UMIL, MPV, Generator, Creator) should then use the APIs provided by the library. Ports to other languages may be interesting at some point but first of all it will be implemented in PHP, obviously.

Currently every tool implements its own parsing or writing. This should be unified.

Since AutoMOD is to be part of phpBB 3.1, and AutoMOD should use it, it needs to follow the phpBB 3.1 code standards. The idea is to include this with phpBB 3.1.

Components

Model: Data representation. Classes that represent a MOD, its meta data, its actions, etc.
IO: Input/Output handling. Load a MOD into the model from an xml/zip. Save the model as an xml/zip.

Where possible these classes and tools should use abstraction. You could write a MOD into various formats (of course, usually it would be MODX).

Formal documentation

Before implementing this library it should be specified properly. This documentation will be useful later on. UML should be used for defining the classes, and their tasks need to be described. The main goal is to have a standard that is usable.

Licensing & release

It would be nice to have the library released under a liberal license, such as MIT. This would prevent license compatibility issues. Since libmodx depends on MODX the version numbers should be synchronised in some way. Perhaps something like "1.2.3-x" where "1.2.3" is the MODX version and x increments with each release for that MODX version.

libmodx should be developed in a separate repository. It can easily be added as git submodule.

Repository

There are some initial design concepts at modx2-dev (github). An initial repo for development has been started at libmodx.

igorw
Registered User
Posts: 500
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 11:47 pm

Re: [RFC] libmodx

Post by igorw »

Some design concepts.

Model
libmodx_model.png
(75.26 KiB) Downloaded 3451 times
Parser
libmodx_parser.png
(96.99 KiB) Downloaded 3451 times
Writer
libmodx_writer.png
(58.1 KiB) Downloaded 3451 times

igorw
Registered User
Posts: 500
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 11:47 pm

Re: [RFC] libmodx

Post by igorw »

This one is actually more AutoMOD-related, but I'll post it in here anyway.

Installer
libmodx_installer.png
(75.66 KiB) Downloaded 3451 times

User avatar
naderman
Consultant
Posts: 1727
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 2:11 am
Location: Karlsruhe, Germany
Contact:

Re: [RFC|Rejected] libmodx

Post by naderman »

No longer relevant.

MartinTruckenbrodt
Posts: 171
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:00 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: [RFC|Rejected] libmodx

Post by MartinTruckenbrodt »

naderman wrote:No longer relevant.
Hello Nils,
why?

Bye Martin
Advanced Block MOD 1.1.1 has been released! - Prevent spam on your phpBB3 board with Stop Forum Spam, BotScout, Akismet, Project Honey Pot and several IP-RBL and Domain-RBL DNS blacklists! - My MODs

User avatar
MichaelC
Development Team
Development Team
Posts: 889
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 6:29 pm

Re: [RFC|Rejected] libmodx

Post by MichaelC »

MartinTruckenbrodt wrote:
naderman wrote:No longer relevant.
Hello Nils,
why?

Bye Martin
Because there is no point re-writing something that is for something we are trying to phase out.
Formerly known as Unknown Bliss
psoTFX wrote: I went with Olympus because as I said to the teams ... "It's been one hell of a hill to climb"
No unsolicited PMs please except for quotes.

MartinTruckenbrodt
Posts: 171
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:00 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: [RFC|Rejected] libmodx

Post by MartinTruckenbrodt »

Hello,
is there a RFC for disallowingMODX based MODs in future? ;)

If dev team want to phase it out then dev team should allow it for Ascraeus for fallback. Then MOD authors will have a chance to migrate their MODs to extensions and to get the nedded skills and experience. And we will see if the new thing really has been successfully.

But I understand your point. The recent Olympus MODX is doing the job good enough. So together with dev teams future plans a migration to another MODX solution makes no sense.

Bye Martin
Advanced Block MOD 1.1.1 has been released! - Prevent spam on your phpBB3 board with Stop Forum Spam, BotScout, Akismet, Project Honey Pot and several IP-RBL and Domain-RBL DNS blacklists! - My MODs

User avatar
MichaelC
Development Team
Development Team
Posts: 889
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 6:29 pm

Re: [RFC|Rejected] libmodx

Post by MichaelC »

MartinTruckenbrodt wrote:Hello,
is there a RFC for disallowingMODX based MODs in future? ;)

If dev team want to phase it out then dev team should allow it for Ascraeus for fallback. Then MOD authors will have a chance to migrate their MODs to extensions and to get the nedded skills and experience. And we will see if the new thing really has been successfully.

But I understand your point. The recent Olympus MODX is doing the job good enough. So together with dev teams future plans a migration to another MODX solution makes no sense.

Bye Martin
1) There isn't an RFC for disallowing MODs as RFCs are for development of phpBB itself, and this is about community contributions, not development.
2) I never said MODs would not be allowed straight away, I said that they were going to be phased out. There is a difference.
3) Similar to what I said in 1, its not up to the dev team to allow/disallow it. It is up to the MOD/Extensions team.

The reason libmodx is an RFC is because it would have been made part of the core in 3.1 with the new MOD Installer.
Formerly known as Unknown Bliss
psoTFX wrote: I went with Olympus because as I said to the teams ... "It's been one hell of a hill to climb"
No unsolicited PMs please except for quotes.

Post Reply