Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-forrest-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 59458 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2004 04:00:25 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Sep 2004 04:00:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 350 invoked by uid 500); 2 Sep 2004 04:00:24 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-forrest-dev-archive@forrest.apache.org Received: (qmail 318 invoked by uid 500); 2 Sep 2004 04:00:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@forrest.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: dev@forrest.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@forrest.apache.org Received: (qmail 307 invoked by uid 99); 2 Sep 2004 04:00:24 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [65.77.211.93] (HELO indexgeo.net) (65.77.211.93) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Sep 2004 21:00:23 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (dsl-109.227.240.220.dsl.comindico.com.au [220.240.227.109]) (authenticated bits=0) by www2.kc.aoindustries.com (8.12.9-20030917/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i8240IEv009625 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2004 23:00:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Revert crust to using forrest-dev From: David Crossley To: dev@forrest.apache.org In-Reply-To: References: <1094043759.32173.5102.camel@ighp> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1094097598.10584.5598.camel@ighp> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) Date: 02 Sep 2004 13:59:59 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > David Crossley wrote: > > Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > > > >>In changing the skins I had not thought that some users do not always > >>update the whole site, but parts of it. > > > > Are you talking about the Incubator stuff? I think that > > is because they have updated one page but not added the > > supporting CSS files, so they have a half-baked mix. > > > > This will always be an issue and there is nothing that > > we can do. If they had most of their site with the "crust" > > skin, then added one page with the "pelt" skin then they > > would have the same problem. > > Yeah, but we have not put in a deprecation period just because we felt > sure that crust would feel like a natural tweak of the previous skin. > > This does not seem to be the case, and it seems to be percieved like a > new skin. > > ... > > I am very reluctant to go back. Lets see what others think. > > > > Should we just force everybody to use "pelt" now? We know > > that it or its successor is where we want to be. > > I think we agree that going to pelt leaving back crust is something we > want to do ASAP, and I'm ok for now. > > The question is wether we should keep the older skins in the distro for > another cycle to give time for our users to switch without surprises. Okay. I thought long about this and reckon that you are right. We bring back the "forrest-site" skin and adorn the build with warnings that it will go away. That lets people migrate to the new skins without shock and without feeling forced. -- David Crossley