I was contracted to create a feedback form for a website that allowed the client to add comments and manage the feedback. Seeing that it was a very simple project and an addition to the site, it brought up the question of whether or not one should make use of a full framework to do that. The site was made up of static pages.
In the past I have always made use of a full framework to develop websites, it didn’t matter which framework, whichever was being used or developing one from scratch. This was the first time that I approached a project and wondered whether it was necessary for all those layers for something so simple.
There are the obvious pros and cons for which ever way one decides to go.
A full framework allows the site to grow and expand with ease, you have all the layers in place, with a good separation between them. So all in all you have a tremendous amount of flexibility. The only con really is that you have a huge base for something so small, that it almost feels like bloat.
Without a full framework, the cons are much greater, like no separation between layers, the need to write those if you want them etc etc. Not able to expand very easily in the future.
Well in the ended I decided to go with the bare minimum as an exercise to see how things worked out. It was simple enough completing the project and getting it functional. It was nice having to go back and write code that you usually just take for granted.
The reason I went that way, was probably the need to break out of this mold of us webheads always wanting to put in the perfect system and will handle all future possible needs of the client, doing it the so called correct way, which we think is correct and not just getting the job done. The question is, how many times have we really had to go back and expand the system. Probably a lot of times, but have we not ended up re-writing things anyway? With the latest, coolest way?