I am in the process of planning a custom web application which will be sold (not SaaS) and so will be required to be installed on different servers. Do you think it would be a bad/good idea to go with Symfony2 or Zend Framework.
I have to choose 1 and can't go with any other framework as I only have extensive knowledge with both of these. Despite my experience with Symfony2, I would still appreciate another opinion.
My main concerns are ease of install on servers and source code protection. Sadly, it would seem ZF already has this going for it in that you don't need 5.3 like Symfony2, and we have Zend Guard.
Any advice is welcome! I am looking to nurture and grow this app and I really want to be sure the first step is the right one.
The Symfony2 download page still says:
Be warned that Symfony 2.0 is not
stable yet; use it with caution
(current version is Beta 1).
So I would wait just a but for Symfony2.
I'm not sure what you mean by source code protection but there is no point in encoding any part of any of the two frameworks since they are both open source (and you should see if their licenses actually do permit that!).
Zend Framework 2 is still in the oven and for the looks of it, Symfony2 will be out of beta way before ZF2. If you can't wait, then use the one that you are most comfortable with. Otherwise, wait for Symfony2 to come out of beta and then wait a little bit more until they iron out it's bugs.
Now, about bundling the framework in your application, you are probably going to need to write an installer of sorts. You could first look at the "sandbox" version of Symfony to see how they did that. It's basically an unzip-it-and-it-works kind of install. No need to set anything up. That could give you some pointers.
Whatever you do, you'll need to write a minimum specs script that users can download and run to check whether their system has everything ready to run your app (check configs, php modules, etc, etc). See SlideShowPro Director for an example of such scripts.
Subjective answer: I'd go with ZF because that's what I know better, but having said that, performance wise I've had better results with Symfony. Apparently ZF2 will have see huge speed improvements.
Related
So I'm about to start a big Property Management System for the cloud. This Hotel system already exists in VB.net technologies, and now we are porting the whole system to web.
We are trying to decide between ASP.net or PHP, we are thinking on PHP because ASP.net would cost too much on licensing and servers. So there is Laravel, Symphony, CodeIgniter, Zend, etc..
The thing is, this project is suppose to live for years to come. But we feel like getting constraint ed by using a PHP framework, because every time the framework gets updated then we need to update our whole system. For example.. now Laravel got updated from version 4 to 5. And the whole folder structure changed. I can't imagine having our big system needing to be updated and keep up to every Laravel version update. How do you keep up with this ?
Also, what would happened if Laravel disappears, its the trendy fashion now. But we see PHP frameworks come and go.
Would it be wiser not to use any php framework and building everything from scratch to have more control over it ?
You should first note that using a framework is primarily meant to solve two issues;
Force coding into a certain 'format'. Collaboratively working on code can generate 'hacked' solutions, or unmaintainable code. A framework can be the force which helps keep these things in check.
A framework comes with a certain core-code which handles for example database abstraction, routing, etc. which can save you a lot of time to develop yourself.
An extra thing to mention; when implementing new features, there is the possibility someone has built it before and maybe even better than you would have anticipated.
Keeping up with the framework should not be too hard, as long as you abide by the coding guidelines of the framework. With the bigger frameworks, new releases have (or after sometime generate) tutorials on how to port your previous version into the new version format.
Choosing which framework to use, is a question which is opinion-based and not suited to discuss here, but keep in mind that you choose your framework according to your needs. Also check how big the community is and how much 3rd party plugins/code exists (the more, the longer the framework will last).
Good luck!
You could see a framework as a base to start from. Remember that you get all the code! Look at the code. Do you like it? Does it fit your requirements? Using a framework gives you a huge advantage over making everything yourself from scratch.
But do you need to update? Would you update your own code constantly? Perhaps it's not always needed. Sure, if there is a security issue you should do something about it, but seeing every update to a framework as essential is just plain nonsense.
I build projects aimed at specific versions of frameworks and libraries. I try to build in flexibility so I can swap out frameworks and libraries, and versions, but I often find that I stick with what's working.
Some people might not like this, and argue you should always be on the latest version, but I find that completely impractical.
The "Framework" question has been asked a bunch of times here but having read everything I can find, I can't find the answer to this question.
I'm creating everything from games, to CMS's, social applications, etc. I've used Zend and CodeUgnighter briefly, but when I deliver it, its going to have a bunch of unnecessary folders and it requires anyone who wants to modify my program to know the framework, and they've got a mountain to move if they want to update it to the latest version of the framework.
It just seems to me that frameworks were designed mostly for super large projects where its being designed for one customer, not a released program. It seems like all the big packaged php products out there make their own frameworks (vbulletin, etc).
its going to have a bunch of unnecessary folders
These uncessary folders are stored in one folder and are needed for the framework to work, is that the 10, 20, 200 Mb which is problem? Storage is cheap nowadays, why cares?
it requires anyone who wants to modify
my program to know the framework
You got it! It is an advantage, not an inconvenient. If it doesn't, the guy which will read your code will need to understand your habits, your convention, and they probably are not so common.
If you are able to write consistent code, following any conventions, why not.
But it can also gives your customer a real plus value since he knows that anyone could take back your work if you have to leave for any reasons.
they've got a mountain to move if they want to update it to the latest version of the framework.
In any case upgrading a framework, an application to a new version is most of the time a moutain since in a production environment, you need to test, and test again, to be sure your application is stable.
Most of the framework give releases notes which should let you know about backward compatibility.
It just seems to me that frameworks
were designed mostly for super large
projects.
Zend or Code Igniter fit well for medium sized project, with time you developed framework extensions and you'll be able to save time and bugs on smaller project.
It seems like all the big packaged php
products out there make their own
frameworks (vbulletin, etc).
PHP framework are youngs, most of them are 3/4 years old (Zend, Symfony). A lot of application like Vbulletin are older.
There a lot application based on common framework, but they don't target the same people.
Joomla, Drupal, Wordpress have their own framework (procedural, or object) but they target more the end-user.
However a solution like Magento, which uses Zend Framework, is designed to be extended and very customizable with extensions.
There are many light-weight PHP MVC frameworks, each with varying degrees of features and flexibility. The majority of these are going to be lacking advanced features, but will get the job done.
One that comes to mind is: http://www.kissmvc.com.
Hope that helps :)
You're right that most frameworks are tailored towards 'one size fits it all', meaning they have a lot of stuff that you won't necessarily need on every project. Which sometimes makes them a bit heavyweight. More 'modern' frameworks DO have a strong focus on modularization, but when it comes to the core there are often a lot of inter-dependencies.
One solution: Roll your own framework, dissect code from other frameworks and use parts you like/need. If you can, lean more towards using libraries that focus on specific tasks that you need. E.g. ORM for databases, you might as well use doctrine since it's area of expertise is very focused. Just as an example.
Either way, if you do it right it's a lot of work upfront trying to figure out what you even need. Start with the basics, how do your controllers work, do you need the full implementation of MVC with front controllers, action controllers, maybe page controllers for a CMS? Where can you cut corners, where not? It really depends a lot on what YOU need for your specific product (or product palette).
The other solution, like Serge mentioned, is getting a lightweight framework which really just focuses on the basics. And fill all the holes yourself, or by using 3rd party libraries where they are available.
I personally use a heavily modified version of FLOW3 (currently in alpha development) which uses a lot of cool stuff, but lacks a bit when it comes to using legacy databases (they have their own domain model implementation). Which is what I changed mostly for my version.
I would like to know about the compatibility between upcoming versions of KO3. I have heard that once 3.1 comes in, it won't be easy to simply upgrade to it from kohana 3.0 (Wordpress upgrade is pretty swift from 2 to version 3)
If I create my project in KO3 (currently using 3.0.6.2), what are the chances that my project will be easily upgradable to 3.1 or above versions without breaking anything ?
Please answer if you are a real pro on KO3 or part of the development team.. This is important.
Major versions (eg: 3.0 to 3.1) may change the API. Currently, the biggest API change will be splitting the Request class into Request and Response, as well as changes to Request that allow external routing. This also implies that the Remote class will be significantly modified to removed completely in favor of external requests and responses.
You can keep track of the changes scheduled for 3.1 by following the 3.1 roadmap.
I'd just like to point out that wordpress is an entirely different system, it's basically an application written on their own framework whereas kohana is just the framework and you supply the application.
If the wordpress core framework changes then they also change their application to account for those modifications. Sometimes plugins aren't compatible across upgrades so the plugin author has to release an update which makes it compatible. All of this is hidden from the front end users, they don't need to be aware of how it works in order to use it.
Kohana on the other hand has no gui or front end, you're getting nitty gritty with the code. If an interface changes then you'll have to adapt your implementation to suit, there's no way around that.
And as antpaw said, unit tests are always useful for making sure things work as expected! For more info see the unittest repo
it highly depends on the features your have used. give it a try and watch your logs or even better: you run unittests. http://github.com/kohana/core/compare/3.1...master if i picked the right repository. this will help you to see the difference betwenn ko3.1 and ko3.0.7
How long do you normally test an update for Zend Framework before pushing it out into a productions project. We can break this question up into minor updates 1.6.0 -> 1.6.1 or maybe a major update 1.6.2 -> 1.7.0. Obviously you don't release it if it add bugs to your code.
Also, as with most other server software updates normally people have a window of time they like to wait and watch the community before even attempting an update on a development environment. How long do you even wait to start the process?
It seems like the best method would be to have a comprehensive set of tests that exercised all the functionality in your application. With a good method for testing it seems like you could push it into production pretty quickly.
Another simple thing you can do to help you make your decision would be to simply do a diff against the repository to see what changes where applied to any modules that you use. If there where no changes, then upgrading shouldn't make any difference. If something underwent a major re-write, you would probably want to investigate a lot deeper.
I'll often jump through update releases (1.7.1 -> 1.7.2) without much hesitation. When the minors roll in, it's another bag of tricks though. For example, there were a lot of changes with Zend's file upload elements, and Zend form in between 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7.
Whether or not I even move on a new release depends on what's been done. Checking the update lists provided is pretty important for deciding on whether or not to go.
As for timing, it varies. There's no set in stone process.
Finding "what breaks" is quickly accomplished with the unit tests. But, who really has a full set of unit tests for their application, right? ;)
Using unit testing will help catch some of the deltas. Zend Framework now comes with Zend_Test to make testing applications a bit easier. I updgrade between projects (so new projects that are coming up will get the latest version).
I am deciding on a framework to try out for PHP. I have narrowed it down to CakePHP and CodeIgniter. I have a couple of questions for any of you who have used or are familiar with both:
I like the fact that CakePHP keeps most of the code outside of the webroot by default. Especially since I may end up using a single framework install for multiple apps. I see CodeIgniter will do that too, but you have to configure it and move some stuff around. Is that workaround secure and reliable, or is it an afterthought hack?
Which (if not both) is easier to upgrade, and maintain over the long term? As new versions of the framework (and PHP itself) come out. I don't want to find my stuff either breaking, or becoming outdated.
Edit:
This is a very old post, but I thought I would update it with what I finally ended up doing, which was to use Kohana.
You should try both frameworks for a week or so, building something trivial (like a blog or wiki) in both, and see which you prefer using. Whatever makes the most sense to you will probably sustain you the longest through upgrades an deprecations.
CakePHP is in a bit of a volatile state right now, still unearthing bugs while pushing to release version 1.2 (which is not backward compatible). I wouldn't suggest building a critical application with it if you need something rock solid right now. If you can wait a month or two for things to settle, then it's probably a moot point.
To address your concerns:
1) Cake and CI do it the same way (iirc). They are equally secure, reliable, and hackish on this front.
2) Everything changes. If you need concrete, perpetual assurance of stability and backward compatibility, roll your own framework. There's not that much to it, and you're guaranteed that nothing changes unless you want it to.
I have deployed multiple applications on CakePHP and it's been a very, very, nice experience. You can't go wrong either way, as both are solid.
is a non-issue.
CodeIgniter has a sponsor behind it, so it's definately the one to choose for the long term. Also, it's faster.
This is a non issue. The app has a couple of lines which says where the core and your application code lies. You just need to change those lines.
You can never anticipate this one.
The state of PHP is a wildcard here. One app (CI) is built to be compatible with PHP4 the other requires PHP5. If you need to deal with the possibilty of a web host only supporting older versions of PHP then you need to go with CO.
Another issue is unit testing. If you require your framework to ship with tests, then CI is not the way to go.
Personally, I feel comfortable with CI because of the corporate backing. The company behind CI is making real profit from their efforts. Though CI is free, their paid product (ExpressionEngine) will eventually live on CI. The same could be said of the Zend Framework and even the birth of Rails (originally built for Basecamp.)
A minor correction to an above comment: both are compatible with PHP4, not just CI. Also, I don't think that having a sponsor makes CI and more or less upgradable or maintainable. Money doesn't solve those problems in the least.
I use CakePHP for a variety of applications and I've been happy with it thus far. 1.2 is a huge improvement over 1.1, and while the library source may change from RC3 to Final, I don't think any code you write will become obsolete. My only niggle is that the Manual isn't as comprehensive as it should be (in my opinion), and I end up in the API quite a bit. The trade-off there is that I now understand the code behind the scenes very well. In any case, I highly recommend it.
On the other hand, I've never played around with CI, so I can't recommend CakePHP over CI. I would take each for a spin and see which one grabs you. Whichever one you choose, study the hell out of its conventions and capabilities. When I started with Cake, I unwittingly wrote a bunch of code to do something Cake did "automagically" by having me set one variable in the controller.
CodeIgniter is very flexible as you would see once you try it. So how your application would be maintainable would fall you your hands.
I have also deployed multiple applications using the same installation. I usually create 2 applications for CMS projects (one for admin, one for the front-end).
To address both of your questions from a CodeIgniter perspective (I don't use Cake):
1) CodeIgniter doesn't keep itself outside the webroot by default, but it can do so with some very simple changes. The first part of my CI tutorial series explains how to do so, along with a walk through of the setup of a new CI instance. Once finished the only part of CI that needs to be in the webroot is a small index.php bootstrap file.
2) I've got an application which I originally developed in CI 1.4.x and I've sucessfully migrated to 1.5.x then 1.6.x. With each new release the CI dev's make available detailed upgrade instructions laying out what needs to be replaced so upgrades are fairly easy.
Jim.