[TYPO3-50-general] RFC: Short filenames

[Nino Martincevic]

This begins to drift away from the original posting, anyway...

>how about:
>
>use this convention and you don't need to configure anything.
>
>If you want to do whatever comes to your mind you also have to configure 
>it. So it combines the best of both worlds?

How about:
You can use conventions and configurations and you have a flexible, scaleable testable and maintainable application. How cool is this?

Could you give some or more examples what actually you mean by "configuration"?

>Configuration always is an extra step and if I like the convention why 
>not use it...

For the simple parts of your life you may use it. But for the more complex ones you should reflect your decision a bit more critical and get your own opinion on it.

For simple or just CRUD applications, too.
But change a complex business logic that effects many rules, objects, boundaries etc. only by adjusting some config options. 
Perhaps you have this kind of software but then you have spent years to develop such a sophisticated business rule manager...

>If I port something from another framework, I don't need to rename 
>everything I just need to configure it properly.

If you are talking about all parts that don't matter to my core application you are right. The ORM, framework, caching, authentication, routing etc. should be configurable or easy pluggable.

There's a BIG difference in understanding what is essential for a really maintainable and therefore extendable application, but it's almost never just convention or configuration...

Cheers,
Nino