CodeIgniter Forums
Office hours - July 2017 - Printable Version

+- CodeIgniter Forums (
+-- Forum: General (
+--- Forum: Events (
+--- Thread: Office hours - July 2017 (/thread-68437.html)

Office hours - July 2017 - jlp - 07-10-2017

I am scheduling some "office hours" early next week: Monday July  17th, 07:00 UTC (midnight my time), and Monday July 17th, 16:00UTC (9am my time).

During a one-hour timeslot starting at the above times, I will be on the CodeIgniter IRC channel to answer questions you might have. I may be joined by one or more of the other council members. For those of you unable to "attend", the transcript will be posted here.

RE: Office hours - July 2017 - Paradinight - 07-10-2017

(07-10-2017, 05:14 PM)jlp Wrote: I am scheduling some "office hours" early next week: Monday July  10th, 07:00 UTC (midnight my time), and Monday July 10th, 16:00UTC (9am my time).

During a one-hour timeslot starting at the above times, I will be on the CodeIgniter IRC channel to answer questions you might have. I may be joined by one or more of the other council members. For those of you unable to "attend", the transcript will be posted here.

is the date correct?

RE: Office hours - July 2017 - ciadmin - 07-10-2017

(07-10-2017, 09:13 PM)Paradinight Wrote:
(07-10-2017, 05:14 PM)jlp Wrote: I am scheduling some "office hours" early next week: Monday July  10th, 07:00 UTC (midnight my time), and Monday July 10th, 16:00UTC (9am my time).

During a one-hour timeslot starting at the above times, I will be on the CodeIgniter IRC channel to answer questions you might have. I may be joined by one or more of the other council members. For those of you unable to "attend", the transcript will be posted here.

is the date correct?

It should be ... the first one will be midnight Sunday or 00:00 Monday, depending on one's perspective.
What seems amiss?

RE: Office hours - July 2017 - Wouter60 - 07-10-2017

I think it should be Monday July 17th, because July 10th was yesterday.

RE: Office hours - July 2017 - ciadmin - 07-11-2017

Thank you, all - I have fixed the date Smile

RE: Office hours - July 2017 - jlp - 07-17-2017

First office hour held, with some lively discussion Smile Transcript follows:

(12:09:25 AM) jlparry: ***************************************************************
(12:09:25 AM) jlparry: Welcome to the CodeIgniter Office Hour(s)
(12:09:25 AM) jlparry: This is Jim Parry, Project Lead
(12:09:25 AM) jlparry: We are here to answer any questions you have. Be nice!
(12:09:25 AM) jlparry: ***************************************************************
(12:10:03 AM) pfote: hey, morning jim
(12:10:14 AM) moveax: morns jlparry
(12:10:15 AM) jlparry: good morning
(12:10:22 AM) jlparry: heya
(12:11:20 AM) slax0r: morning jlparry
(12:11:21 AM) jlparry: first of two "office hours" announced last week ... we'll see if anyone shows up for it :)
(12:11:34 AM) moveax: lets play the old but gold question first, whats the state of CI4. Do you think development is running fine or are there any corner cases?
(12:12:18 AM) jlparry: CI4 is coming along, but slower than we want to see.
(12:13:00 AM) jlparry: there is lots of interest, and lots of questions about its scheduled release date, but not a whole lot of contributors stepping up.
(12:13:11 AM) jlparry: what do you mean by "corner cases"?
(12:14:30 AM) moveax: you answered that allready :) things that are not going as well as you thought
(12:14:59 AM) jlparry: ah ... :)
(12:15:11 AM) xxc_michael: Since CI4 will have composer and in some way now - laravel (the most famous now a days - is considered mvc with composer) how do you plan to differ from what's already famous
(12:16:40 AM) moveax: uh nice, just saw forge the first time
(12:16:46 AM) jlparry: we're not trying to be another L**l :-/ In distinct contrast to them, we don't plan to have everything including the kitchen sink bundled with the framework
(12:16:50 AM) moveax: that could replace some of my scripts
(12:16:58 AM) slax0r: please don't turn CI into laravel...
(12:17:01 AM) slax0r: for the love of god
(12:17:09 AM) slax0r: let the false facades and broken designs die there
(12:17:11 AM) jlparry: and unlike some others, we have no intent of a micro small core, with a million pieces that have to be installed using composer
(12:17:46 AM) slax0r: I'm guessing performance is still your primary "concern"?
(12:18:07 AM) xxc_michael: please let him finish his answer
(12:18:10 AM) jlparry: instead, i believe that CI4 will continue to be lean & simple, but with an awesome plugin mechanism
(12:18:35 AM) slax0r: don't be butthurt just because I called laravel shit
(12:19:13 AM) jlparry: primary concern? i wouldn't say so. I would suggest that the architecture is more important, and that we will have to make it perform as well as it can
(12:19:36 AM) jlparry: the indications so far are encouraging ... i think CI4 should still be competitive, performance wise
(12:20:25 AM) xxc_michael: i'm not - I love CI and i despise Laravel , last year i've been working on it and it's slowly shifted all my projects ... jlparry let's rephrase the question: Couple of months forward CI4 is out - what will your answer to the question "Why should i choose CI4 instead of Laravel 7 be?
(12:21:49 AM) xxc_michael: and i'm asking about vague answers ... like CI4 will definatelly have backwards compability and will support X the next few years
(12:21:59 AM) jlparry: i expect the answer to be something along the lines of "choose CI4 because of its flexibility & performance, without it getting in your way or forcing you to do things a specific way"
(12:22:26 AM) moveax: :)
(12:22:33 AM) jlparry: i don't expect everyone to agree with that :-/
(12:23:18 AM) jlparry: composer was mentioned earlier ... CI4 should be composer installable, or thru a single download for those who don't want to use it
(12:24:43 AM) jlparry: personally, i have been playing with git submodules as a way to incorporate the framework into an app - it is working well for me
(12:25:07 AM) jlparry: so ...git installable instead of composer or tarball :-/
(12:28:34 AM) pfote: git installable sounds good to me
(12:30:23 AM) slax0r: erm, I don't think CI4 will be backward compatible with CI3, I think this was specifically said, was it not?
(12:30:25 AM) jlparry: it is actually turning out very interesting :)
(12:30:32 AM) slax0r: how hard will it be to port existing CI2/3 apps to CI4?
(12:31:07 AM) pfote: not backwards compatible? thats bad
(12:31:10 AM) jlparry: it will be more a rewrite than a port ... thinking "CI4-like"
(12:31:33 AM) slax0r: jlparry: I mean, port user code to CI4, not port CI3 to CI4 :)
(12:31:37 AM) jlparry: it is not intended to be backwards compatible, at the code level, but more at the philosophy level
(12:32:05 AM) xxc_michael: yes it wont but compared to .... laravel each version breaks the previous one - even LTS versions are not easily switchable
(12:32:49 AM) jlparry: my answer stands :) a straightforward port is awkward, with the "services" focus.
(12:32:56 AM) xxc_michael: philosophy level is enough
(12:33:04 AM) moveax: how long will ci3 be supported after the ci4 release?
(12:34:23 AM) jlparry: having said that, the autoloader supports psr4 loading, and classmap loading, and "legacy" loading if a class is not found either of those ways. that should facilitate "porting" a CI3 app somewhat gently.
(12:34:25 AM) slax0r: jlparry: ci4 will be service based?
(12:35:22 AM) pfote: philosophy level, hrm
(12:35:40 AM) jlparry: moveax: CI3 should be around for a few years after the release of CI4
(12:36:20 AM) moveax: that's good
(12:36:48 AM) jlparry: slax0r: not so much "services-based" as having a one-stop shop to locate pieces. tells some of the story, but the source code might be more revealing ...
(12:37:19 AM) jlparry: pfote: philosophy ... "lean, mean useful machine" ... and then expanding on what each of those might mean
(12:39:30 AM) jlparry: the docs need better explanation of how to write an adapter for your favorite "x", and then integrate that with our "services". We have no plans to write 15 "x"s, to keep everyone happy, but to provide adapters for some and directions for bundling your favorites
(12:39:59 AM) jlparry: CI4 remains lean as a result, but super flexible for those who want to go beyond
(12:40:36 AM) jlparry: at the same time, we are doing our damndest to not force a particular "x" on developers
(12:40:54 AM) pfote: yeah but it drops the main reason i use it, compatibility
(12:40:59 AM) jlparry: for "x", substitute authentication, templating, middleware, etc
(12:41:15 AM) slax0r: interesting approach
(12:41:16 AM) jlparry: pfote: compatibility ... as in?
(12:42:13 AM) pfote: backward compatibilty .. upgradability, usable for long term projects
(12:43:15 AM) jlparry: backward compatibility - i agree. upgradability & long term, I think CI4 will rock; and "compatibility" with one's favorite "x" - awesome
(12:43:56 AM) pfote: well, if you break the CI3 to 4 path .. what tells me the 4 to 5 path will be different?
(12:45:08 AM) jlparry: i am not convinced that there will be a CI5, or a path to it ... it is way too early to tell. my gut says that microservices and the "cloud" are  are trying hard to eliminate frameworks like what we see today
(12:46:53 AM) moveax: so there will be an upgrade path from 3 to 4? that wasn't clear for me
(12:47:02 AM) Vict0r: MOrning
(12:47:18 AM) pfote: well maybe .. maybe not. i'm used to build projects that run 5, 10, 15 years maybe, so i look for that stuff.
(12:47:18 AM) moveax: we all can live with "change x in models, change y in controllers and it will work in ci4"
(12:48:08 AM) moveax: changes in the filename convention wasnt a problem for anyone here, and since ci4 will php7 only anyone knows that they will have a few things in their codebase
(12:48:09 AM) pfote: didnt sound like that to me moveax .. more like a new framework with "the same philosphy in mind"
(12:48:10 AM) jlparry: an "upgrade path" might be too strong of a label - it is more of a set of mini tutorials ... here's how to convert a CI3 "z" component to the equivalent in CI4.
(12:48:11 AM) slax0r: well, microservices do have their place, but they are certainly not a hamer, and every problem is not a nail
(12:48:15 AM) slax0r: so...
(12:49:11 AM) moveax: so lets call it a migration guide :) i don't fear changes in my codebase as long as they keep trackable and i don't be forced to change my logic
(12:49:13 AM) jlparry: slax0r: totally agreed, but they are ever so "sexy" nowadays, and i think a lot of pointy-haired bosses want to jump on that bandwagon
(12:51:08 AM) jlparry: CI has never tried to be the "sexiest" (unlike some), or the one with the biggest footprint, but instead the most useful
(12:51:14 AM) jlparry: and easiest to learn
(12:51:46 AM) slax0r: I hope you are not planning on implementing an ORM?
(12:51:56 AM) slax0r: existing or new built
(12:51:59 AM) slax0r: s/or/nor
(12:52:05 AM) moveax: as far as i saw in the repo, they don't
(12:52:45 AM) jlparry: moveax: it has been awkward coming up with a "porting" guide, since there haven't been enough of the pieces in place yet, but i think we are getting close to that point. Lonnie is planning a CI4 book, with some complete examples, while I am trying to come up with some mini tutorials
(12:53:38 AM) jlparry: slax0r: we have no plans to implement an ORM, but if someone likes the "x" ORM, it should be easily integratable into their app
(12:53:59 AM) pfote: sounds more like a "python 2 to 3" migration .. well lets see how it turns out, havent looked at anything CI4 related yet
(12:54:05 AM) jlparry: of course, many of the ORMs I have seen have an incredible set of dependencies, rendering them less practical used on their own :-/
(12:54:45 AM) xxc_michael: How easy will composer integration Or other package dependency manager integration be
(12:55:23 AM) jlparry: pfote: if your interest is predominently long-term, then i would wait for the alpha, which should be more settled than the current codebase, and which should have some better guidelines/tutorials
(12:55:37 AM) xxc_michael: you said CI4 won't come with composer integrated - do you plan on integrating something , for that
(12:55:47 AM) jlparry: xxc_michael: composer integration - trivial, already there.
(12:56:01 AM) jlparry: xxc_michael: other package dependency manager? as in??
(12:56:05 AM) pfote: ok
(12:56:47 AM) jlparry: xxc_michael: i said that CI4 won't *have* to be installed using composer, but it *does* support it
(12:57:51 AM) slax0r: other way around would be awkward
(12:59:12 AM) xxc_michael: since composer will be there - i wrongly understood the argument that it will be git installable
(12:59:41 AM) Vict0r: Morning
(12:59:42 AM) Vict0r: :D
(01:06:57 AM) jlparry: All: Are there any other questions or points to raise?
(01:08:50 AM) slax0r: not at the moment
(01:10:29 AM) marcogmonteiro: morning
(01:11:10 AM) jlparry: There will be another session in just under eight hours. I will post the transcript for this session with the event notice on the forum
(01:11:28 AM) jlparry: ***************************************************************
(01:11:28 AM) jlparry: Thank you for having joined us for the CodeIgniter Office Hour
(01:11:28 AM) jlparry: ***************************************************************

RE: Office hours - July 2017 - jlp - 07-17-2017

Second session transcript:

(08:58:53 AM) jlparry: ***************************************************************
(08:58:53 AM) jlparry: Welcome to the CodeIgniter Office Hour(s)
(08:58:53 AM) jlparry: This is Jim Parry, Project Lead
(08:58:53 AM) jlparry: We are here to answer any questions you have. Be nice!
(08:58:53 AM) jlparry: ***************************************************************
(09:20:13 AM) marcogmonteiro: hey jlparry
(09:20:39 AM) jlparry: hey marco
(09:21:31 AM) arkore: I have questions
(09:22:23 AM) arkore: 1) What is a real-world example of using a package in CodeIgniter that is installed from composer.
(09:22:23 AM) jlparry: arkore: shoot
(09:22:49 AM) arkore: How is it done
(09:23:05 AM) LouCypher: hey jlparry
(09:23:14 AM) arkore: paths.  package structure.
(09:24:43 AM) LouCypher: uhm .. how's that ci related ?
(09:25:06 AM) jlparry: arkore: any number of stand-alone packages on would be good candidates: guzzle, logging, mock objects, timing, sodium_compat
(09:25:11 AM) jlparry: LouCypher: heya
(09:25:28 AM) arkore: ok, logging for example.  let's say i want to use that in my CI app
(09:25:43 AM) jlparry: arkore: in your project, composer install banana (for instance), and then just use the banana classes in their namespace, where needed
(09:25:45 AM) skope: look from repos
(09:26:02 AM) arkore: "hen just use"
(09:26:02 AM) LouCypher: arkore here's composer.json for installing kenjis twig
(09:26:03 AM) LouCypher:
(09:26:04 AM) arkore: "then just use"
(09:26:06 AM) skope: then just use
(09:26:15 AM) jlparry: arkore: composer install monolog/monolog (
(09:26:16 AM) arkore: if it's in vendor.  how to you properly load it?
(09:26:19 AM) arkore: vendor/ path
(09:26:24 AM) skope: arkore: have you read the docs?
(09:26:26 AM) skope: codeigniter docs
(09:26:29 AM) skope: it's mentioned there
(09:26:32 AM) arkore: i have docs open
(09:26:36 AM) skope: good
(09:26:44 AM) jlparry: composer takes care of that -> installing a composer package updates composer.json in your project
(09:26:55 AM) arkore: jlparry, yes
(09:26:57 AM) arkore: true
(09:27:40 AM) arkore:
(09:27:44 AM) jlparry: and that informs the CI4 autoloader, i.e. adding wherever-you-installed-that-even-if-not-in-vendor to the list of namespaced folders
(09:27:48 AM) arkore: see.  no examples provided.
(09:27:58 AM) skope: arkore: Additionally, if you want CodeIgniter to use a Composer auto-loader, just set $config['composer_autoload'] to TRUE or a custom path in application/config/config.php.
(09:28:02 AM) skope: in that page
(09:28:12 AM) arkore: yes, i have mine set to a path.
(09:28:28 AM) skope: arkore: and?
(09:28:41 AM) arkore: there is no example syntax on that autoloader page.
(09:28:48 AM) skope: example syntax of whaT?
(09:28:55 AM) arkore: example syntax of "using" the resource being autoloaded.  using it in your code.
(09:29:05 AM) marcogmonteiro: jlparry I have a question not a tecnical one, just to know what your position is on it... the use of external dependencies on ci4
(09:29:18 AM) skope: arkore: why would codeigniter guide you with using php?
(09:29:27 AM) jlparry: arkore: ... ?
(09:29:29 AM) arkore: shouldn't codeigniter say "$this->load->library()" wont work?
(09:29:37 AM) skope: no
(09:29:42 AM) skope: because it's not related
(09:29:50 AM) skope: composer is not part of codeigniter
(09:29:53 AM) skope: you can add it
(09:30:01 AM) arkore: yet, it is in a way.
(09:30:08 AM) skope: which way
(09:30:20 AM) arkore: the fact that CI supports it and has a config item for it.
(09:30:27 AM) skope: ci supports mysql too
(09:30:33 AM) skope: you don't see manual of mysql in the docs
(09:30:41 AM) arkore: yes, and we use ->db for that
(09:30:53 AM) skope: you didn't get what i was meaning
(09:31:05 AM) skope: why would codeigniter docs teach you how to code php?
(09:31:10 AM) skope: or use composer
(09:31:16 AM) arkore: im not asking for codeigniter docs to teach me how to code.
(09:31:19 AM) skope: because composer docs itself are more extensive than ci
(09:31:20 AM) arkore: perhaps this is a bad time for questions.
(09:31:31 AM) skope: no, this is office hour
(09:31:37 AM) skope: this is the right time for questions
(09:31:42 AM) jlparry: questions for me :)
(09:31:56 AM) skope: haha lol
(09:32:00 AM) skope: that i didn't know
(09:32:55 AM) jlparry: marcogmonteiro: see earlier transcript. bundling external things through dependencies -> bad; making it easy for *you* to bundle/incorporate whatever external things tickle your fancy -> good
(09:33:54 AM) arkore: jlparry, does CI advocate usage of composer?
(09:33:58 AM) Vict0r: when is CI 4  coming out?
(09:34:33 AM) jlparry: arkore: composer dependencies in CI3 might warrant an example in the user guide, or there may already be examples on the forum. composer dependencies in CI4 not an issue, taken care of automatically
(09:34:51 AM) jlparry: arkore: CI supports composer, but doesn't insist on it
(09:36:11 AM) arkore: yes, example.  because you see, not all CI packages (in the form of composer packages, not sparks, or whatver) are not true CI packages obviously, because 1) their library name is not prefixed with CI_, and 2) vendor/...whatever/ is not the correct path for overriding libraries of CI obviously, because the correct path is application/core/ for example.
(09:36:15 AM) jlparry: Vict0r: seriously, "when it is ready". there are still work packages that we want to see in the alpha, that the community will/may eventually step up to implement. if not, we could always scale back the design/vision etc so as to afford an earlier release date :-/
(09:36:50 AM) Vict0r: oh yeah I know .. but havent heard anything .. just wondering if its months or years
(09:36:57 AM) jlparry: arkore: composer is *not* meant for CI components (CI_...)l it is intended to use with generally-reusable PHP things
(09:37:17 AM) marcogmonteiro: Vict0r check the repositiory
(09:37:29 AM) jlparry: arkore: composer can install stuff wherever you like, eg in vendors/... or in third_party/...
(09:37:32 AM) arkore: yes, jlparry, but what is the recommended way of loading these libraries into CI?
(09:38:06 AM) LouCypher: $this->load->library ?
(09:38:09 AM) jlparry: Vict0r: a multiple of months or a fraction of years
(09:38:25 AM) jlparry: LouCypher: no... arkore is asking about composer installed stuff
(09:38:27 AM) arkore: is that even a concept?
(09:39:33 AM) jlparry: arkore: if you composer install guzzlehttp/guzzle, then you simply "new \Guzzle\Whatever\Component()" where you need it (i am paraphrasing)
(09:39:39 AM) skope: arkore: not being rude, but you really should learn more php
(09:39:45 AM) arkore: jlparry, i want to make a package for codeigniter in 2017.  where can i find docs on this?  where can i find 2 real-world examples of true CI packages.
(09:39:47 AM) jlparry: arkore: is what a concept?
(09:40:26 AM) jlparry: arkore: uses guzzle, composer installed
(09:40:56 AM) arkore: jlparry, the userguide should include that sample syntax you just provided.  this isn't teaching the reader PHP, it's presenting the userguide material in a better way for certain people that read and absorb material in certain ways.
(09:40:57 AM) jlparry: arkore: is an example of a CI package that I use for teaching
(09:40:59 AM) skope: jlparry: i think he's trying to make libraries and helpers for codeigniter and wants to know how those are published
(09:41:24 AM) skope: so your second link is relevant
(09:41:26 AM) jlparry: arkore: the latter has no composer, only libraries, helpers and views
(09:41:40 AM) arkore: skope, that too
(09:42:21 AM) arkore: sorry, i didn't mean for this question to split into 2 questions.
(09:43:00 AM) marcogmonteiro: jedi academy <3
(09:43:03 AM) marcogmonteiro: sign me up
(09:47:08 AM) arkore: both those links are good and informative on the current standard.  i had trouble finding good examples from this list:
(09:47:42 AM) arkore: you see that config "vendor-dir": "application/vendor"  part in composer.json ?
(09:47:45 AM) skope: well, not an official repo
(09:47:52 AM) arkore: you see.  that should be in userguide
(09:47:56 AM) jlparry: arkore: CI packages are written up in the user guide as part of the loader ...
(09:48:04 AM) skope: arkore: no it should not, it's composer thing
(09:48:06 AM) skope: not codeigniter thing
(09:48:06 AM) arkore: none of the composer videos or tutorials example that, or provide real-world examples.
(09:48:41 AM) skope: if you need to use composer, you use composer docs to learn it
(09:48:51 AM) jlparry: arkore: that "awesome" repo is not affiliated with the project
(09:49:06 AM) jlparry: arkore: i see no composer.json in that repo
(09:49:40 AM) arkore: jlparry, it's a list
(09:50:41 AM) jlparry: arkore: agreed. which composer.json are you referring to with config vendor-dir"...?
(09:50:44 AM) arkore: what is the reason CI doesn't provide sample code?
(09:51:10 AM) arkore: is there some goal to keep docs as small as possible or something?
(09:51:13 AM) skope: sample code of what?
(09:51:15 AM) jlparry: arkore: there is tons of sample code in the user guide, perhaps not what you are looking for
(09:51:18 AM) arkore: of what i just said
(09:51:27 AM) skope: examples can't cover all use cases
(09:51:28 AM) arkore: jlparry, yeah, thats why i love CI docs
(09:51:35 AM) arkore: best docs i've ever seen
(09:51:37 AM) skope: not in a million years
(09:51:47 AM) arkore: a lot of projects could learn from CI's docs
(09:51:53 AM) arkore: i'm just saying though.
(09:51:58 AM) arkore: for this one area.
(09:52:09 AM) arkore: bah.
(09:52:15 AM) jlparry: arkore: neither of the above examples will make it into the user guide, because they reflect personal preferences, and are not the only way to use those
(09:52:41 AM) arkore: we really going to let "personal preferences" stop us from providing docs?
(09:52:47 AM) skope: yes
(09:52:48 AM) jlparry: arkore: yes
(09:52:53 AM) arkore: i strongly disagree.
(09:52:56 AM) skope: because docs are already there, just not in ci docs
(09:53:10 AM) arkore: nah.  you see.  this is the problem.
(09:53:21 AM) arkore: what's happening right now, is a problem we are failing to recognize.
(09:53:40 AM) jlparry: arkore: that "awesome" list has some horribly out-of-date or abandoned things on it (eg sparks).
(09:53:57 AM) arkore: jlparry, exactly.  thats why i'm happy to see the 2 links you provided.
(09:54:14 AM) arkore: there's no docs or links for me to find this information.
(09:54:17 AM) skope: please open up that problem
(09:54:21 AM) arkore: i had to come to you.
(09:54:25 AM) jlparry: arkore: there will be an official curated addins resource list, on the CI website, but not until I have time to work on it
(09:56:16 AM) skope: i have no patience
(09:56:27 AM) jlparry: arkore: part of my murky plan/vision was to setup the jedi-academy repo for examples, but i don't want to "force" my preferences (public folder, template parser, etc)
(09:57:19 AM) jlparry: arkore: Lonnie has written a CI3 e-book with better real-world examples, and is planning the same for CI4
(09:58:53 AM) arkore: cool.  I will have to revisit this later, I need to get back to work.  Thanks for your time, guys.
(10:01:56 AM) jlparry: arkore: can you email me your collected thoughts on what you see missing from the CI user guide? i have limited time, but will see what I can do
(10:02:35 AM) arkore: k
... Victor & skope apologized for offtopic messages & links ...
(10:03:55 AM) jlparry: interesting discussion & direction ... I will see how the edit turns out!
(10:05:06 AM) Vict0r: I though you were talking about star wars
(10:05:49 AM) jlparry: Vict0r: no, is a repo of mine with examples etc for my students
(10:06:07 AM) Vict0r: ahh xD alright
(10:06:26 AM) skope: my friend teaches programming in university too
(10:06:30 AM) skope: hmm not university, the other one
(10:06:42 AM) skope: anyway, it's nice to see that teaching materials are in github
(10:07:06 AM) jlparry: I also use the jedi-academy repo to open source my coursework
(10:08:43 AM) jlparry: ***************************************************************
(10:08:43 AM) jlparry: Thank you for having joined us for the CodeIgniter Office Hour
(10:08:43 AM) jlparry: ***************************************************************

RE: Office hours - July 2017 - PaulD - 07-17-2017

Very interesting read - thank you for posting.

My favourite comment
Quote:" gut says that microservices and the "cloud" are  are trying hard to eliminate frameworks like what we see today"

Could not agree more, and soon after
Quote:"..but they are ever so "sexy" nowadays, and i think a lot of pointy-haired bosses want to jump on that bandwagon"

So true. Suffering from that at the moment. Current project has so many services, tied to together with other services, that the business itself is starting to work not how is best for the business, but how the limitations and weaknesses of the services force them to work. And in truth, for very little benefit. And I have some pointy-haired bosses to boot - lol - that really made me giggle.