@Kace:
No one is averse to design discussions, but you came at it from the  
wrong angle. You did not ask why the dispatcher was designed the way  
it is. You came out and said it was flawed. This approach rarely wins  
you any followers. I believe I answered pretty clearly in very early  
on in this thread warning you that you were approaching the  
discussion from a place that could piss people off.

-"Mathematically one counter-example is all it takes to "disprove" a  
framework."
but the point is that your example does not work because there is an  
optional route you can use. Again, why prefix everything when there  
are few reserved words?

In any case, we have an RFC procedure on https://trac.cakephp.org  
that is reserved for design discussions. Its pretty simple, you  
submit a ticket marked RFC and someone replies to it. The google  
group is not where development takes place. BTW, We are working on  
2.0 which reworks some of 1.0 and adds much more. Constructive  
criticism is welcome, but the approach is as important as the  
content. Do not tell people who work extremely hard and have spent a  
tremendous amount of time thinking about the design that they are  
flawed, when you yourself just joined the list the day of your first  
post and the time you spent inspecting the framework is only a week.  
It will not get you very far.

Good Luck.


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cake 
PHP" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to