Core vs. Reactor

[eluser]mr_prasanna[/eluser]
@toopay,
We recently began work on this project. It's fresh. We do make use of jQuery and several jQuery plugins. Modules yes. We had some issues with routes in 1.7.x (older projects) and 2.0 reactor seems to have better options. We also want to move towards PHP 5.x. OAuth, FB, JS RPC not in this project. We have some libraries for payment processing and shipment gateways and we will upgrade them to 2.0

[eluser]toopay[/eluser]
Good for you, then.

[eluser]Phil Sturgeon[/eluser]
[quote author="toopay" date="1296668708"]First of all, try to think first, is there any urgency to upgrade? What can not be done by the previous version (1.7.x), which can be done by the latest version (2.0, either Core or Reactor), for your project. Such as, if your project is not too much to deal with Javascript and Modules (which may be advantages of the latest version), and your project is finished or nearly finished, why should there be an upgrade?[/quote]

Of course, nobody suggested that this was the case. If you are just about to launch a client site running 1.7.3 then there is no point whatsoever upgrading just for the sake of it.

If you are working on a long-term project or starting from scratch then using CI 2.0 makes sense as at some point upgrading will be an option. Imagine ignoring it for now, spending 3 months creating an application then have to upgrade the whole darn thing just for one new feature. How frustrating would that be?

"If it ain't broke dont fix it"

Also, what did you mean about upgrading your views? As far as I am aware nothing has changed in the way views work. Upgrading is ridiculously simple, can be done in 5 minutes. if you do not use Validation library, lots of plugins or old versions of HMVC.

[eluser]toopay[/eluser]
@phil : Please, dont be misunderstood. First, CI was a great framework. I like it. And yes, it makes me more productive, had save alot of my time and make my life easier. Sure, everybody here, know it.

Second. Then, someone, who already had a project done, (i assume its done, reffering to this highlight)

All of the sites are live and already have a customer base.

, after read some new version release (reffering to this highlight)

Now that the 2.0 is out

want to upgrade his framework, and asking question like "which version, which should be used". I just give him some suggestion, to think again about it.

Third, when i wrote "views", it refers to the insights about what should be done, after analyzing the reasons for upgrading, so it was not referring to the "view" in CI terminology.

Last. I have no intention, to confuse or ignore, the fact that the latest release has been launched. Sorry if anyone felt that way.

Cheers.

[eluser]Phil Sturgeon[/eluser]
Sounds like this is just a language barrier thing. I thought you were making a few weird points but that makes sense now

[eluser]toopay[/eluser]

Sounds like this is just a language barrier thing

@ Phil, and everyone who misunderstood : Sorry for my english then.

Can i ask you a question, just simple one. Why, ElisLab launch two version instead one?

[eluser]Phil Sturgeon[/eluser]
No worries, I can't speak a word of another language other than "how much is that", "i'd like a pint" and "where are the toilets". I have that covered for most of Europe, so that is enough for me!

The Core and Reactor explanations can be found in the blog post we wrote up for the release.

http://codeigniter.com/news/codeigniter_2.0.0_released/

[eluser]mr_prasanna[/eluser]
We've some web apps running on 1.7.3 and we will leave them as is for now.
The new project we started few weeks ago, I think we really wanted to do it with 2.0

And the points typoo raised are accurate. I think any team doing a project should give enough thought.

@phil you may have to consider editing your signature. Be specific on what CI form PyroCMS uses

Thanks Guys

[eluser]Phil Sturgeon[/eluser]
CodeIgniter Reactor 2.0 is now considered "CodeIgniter".

1.7.3 is old and Core 2.0 is "enterprise only". Reactor is the branch that should be used. Putting Reactor in my signature would cause more confusion.

[eluser]mr_prasanna[/eluser]
perfect!