Re: K3 form library

Based on very little outside of your email, I think Formo is a reasonable
way to go.  I had a long talk with the Kohana devs a couple of years ago
about whether to use Form/Validation or Forge.  Their opinion was that
Forge was unnecessary overhead, but without Forge I was unable to solve the
problem of allowing modules to extend forms, provide validation and do
error handling.  We need that capability which means that we need a form
object of some kind that we can pass around.  Converting will be a pain,
but that's ok - let's do it and not look back.

-Bharat


On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:52 AM, Shad Laws <shad-xpYdmXCiSuZWk0Htik3J/[email protected]> wrote:

> Hey gang,
>
> So, the Forge we used in K2 is gone.  Replacing it is probably going to be
> one of the stickier points of the K2->K3 process, especially for contrib
> modules.
>
> I've started peeking at K3-compatible alternatives, and have found three
> principal options:
> 1. Formo module
> 2. Forge module
> 3. the built-in Form and Validation classes
>
> --
>
> FORMO
>
> In fact, version 1.x (K2 compatible) was suggested a long time ago (
> https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/652).  Version 2.x is
> for K3, and is here:
> https://github.com/bmidget/kohana-formo
>
> It seems to be fairly actively maintained... and it has docs!
> https://github.com/bmidget/kohana-formo/blob/master/guide/formo/menu.md
>
> This seems to be a pretty good way to go.
>
> --
>
> FORGE
>
> I stumbled across this:
> https://github.com/kohana-addons/forge
>
> ... which appears to be a K3-compatible version of Forge.  Excited by the
> prospect of a simpler swap, I took a glance at its source... and learned
> that it doesn't seem to share the same API as the old one.  In other words,
> it doesn't appear to be any easier/harder to implement than Formo.
>
> However, it does appear to have less documentation and less active
> maintenance (only a single commit).
>
> --
>
> BUILT-IN CLASSES
>
> We could also forgo using object-oriented forms altogether and use the
> base Form class to make the views and the base Validation class to check
> the entries before we write them.  In fact, googling around for K3 form
> modules lands upon several sites that suggest that this is the simpler way
> to go.
>
> Some pros:
> - no extra modules to keep up with and/or go out of date
> - easier division of view and controller (Form is used in the view to make
> the form, Validation is used in the controller to process the inputs)
> Some cons:
> - need to implement our own error messages, etc.
> - no tie-in with ORM (although I think this is a Forge/Formo capability we
> don't really use anyway, no?)
> - not object-oriented
> - probably harder to translate existing modules to use this method
>
> --
>
> My current opinion is that Formo is the way to go.  Thoughts?
>
> Take care,
> Shad
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
> __[ g a l l e r y - d e v e l ]_________________________
>
> [ list info/archive --> http://gallery.sf.net/lists.php ]
> [ gallery info/FAQ/download --> http://gallery.sf.net ]
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar

__[ g a l l e r y - d e v e l ]_________________________

[ list info/archive --> http://gallery.sf.net/lists.php ]
[ gallery info/FAQ/download --> http://gallery.sf.net ]