![]() ![]() Let me quote Dries' opinion on embracing change from his blog post: If I do not want to relearn stuff, I do not go into IT and certainly not Drupal. It also means that one has to relearn stuff sometimes. Drupal has established itself as a bleeding edge CMF and bleeding edge often means utilizing new technologies, a scalable programming paradigm (hello OOP) and breaking backward compatibility. In IT one should change something as soon as it is out of date instead of waiting until it breaks. ![]() Why fix if it ain't broke? I hear all the time. Obviously it's more convenient to do the same thing over and over instead. Nah, Iet's fork Drupal instead.ĭrupal 8 forces established developers to learn something new. Maybe I should have stayed with Wordpress. In essence it seems the main reason is conservatism and fear of all the new things that come with Drupal 8:ĭrupal 8 is using many new libraries and established technologies instead of further developing its own ones - bad.ĭrupal 8 is utilizing OOP - what is it and who needs it? Writing loose functions in hooks has been working fine so far, why change that?ĭrupal 8 is not backwards compatible (quelle surprise). The problem with these motivations is that, using my previous attempt to categorize reasons for forking, they are very technology related. I will not spend much time summarizing the motivations behind Backdrop - go ahead and take a look here. Why is forking Drupal into Backdrop a bad thing. This is why the Backdrop creators' reassuring statements about cross contribution should be taken with a grain of salt. ![]() No matter how much effort is put into collaboration between the fork and the original project, in the end it always ends in lack of compatibility and refusal to provide support to confused users in the different camp. In the best case scenario, forking is choosing the lesser evil. It leads not only to separate code bases, but also to a divided developer and user community and should be considered last resort. But forking itself is bad for the project, as it results in two projects with weaker development and support, a weakened potential to grow and a divided and confused user base. The ability to fork is wonderful, as it gives great power to the community. did you not just say forking was wonderful? Projects get forked for reasons that can be categorized in political (changing ownership rights, controversial decisions made by the project maintainers, etc.), technology related (where maintainers disagree about the direction of development and implementation) and personal. In the open source community, the ability to fork software projects is a wonderful thing, as it allows taking a software snapshot in a completely different direction from what was intended by its current maintainers. The ability to fork is a wonderful thing. Please note the date of the article - it may not be current nor does it necessarily reflect the author's current opinion on the matter. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |