forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <>
Subject Re: [Proposal] New format for skinconf
Date Thu, 14 Apr 2005 07:29:19 GMT
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 21:23 +0200, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>>Thorsten Scherler wrote:
>>>On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 13:42 +0200, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>>>> - making a skin have a default skinconf that can be overridden: in 
>>>>this way, all Apache could have an Apache skin with the copyright 
>>>>already set, and a consistent look;
>>>Hmm, in 0.8 we will not have the traditional skins that we have right
>>>now. They become views based on contracts. 
>>I hope that's not what we are going to tell our users =-)
> Why not? We are >1.0 and we are enhancing everyday. Why should I not
> tell the user that the things we have done before now we can do better? 

Don't get me wrong. I'm just talking about the wording, not the 
substance, which I feel is the right way forward. I don't think that 
many users would feel Forrest is easy, if to change style they have to 
change the "views based on contracts". ;-)

>>>This contracts can be written
>>>the way you just suggested. Create a default copyright contract that can
>>>be used apache wide.
>>>....BUT I would not suggest to keep it in the skinconf. The skinconf is
>>>to inflexible due to the fact that it is configuring the WHOLE site and
>>>not only on a per page/document base. What would you do when you have a
>>>one page or a couple of pages with different copyright notices?
>>This is part of the other thread, the per-page based properties. 
>>Skinconf should be only the default for each section or page, that can 
>>overried it's values, I agree.
>>I think I have to stop here on this, as one should now mix that thread 
>>with this conclusion and come to a unified design, and I'm too tired.
>>Wanna try? :-)
> I am not only trying, dude. It is out there! Install the plugins and
> have a look. 

I'm talking about unifiend the new skinconf format with the more 
granular configuration Ross discussed about. I know that you did a very 
good job with the view concept, that has never been in question.

> I am talking since November last year about the concept and finally got
> the chance to implement it because I could take the time. 
> I know that the skins are coming from you and they are REALLY great but
> they have their limitations. In the future I HOPE that the same some
> committer will say regarding the view concept (I am already seeing
> limitations that I do not like).
> It is not about an unified design it is about to make it happen. I would
> be VERY HAPPY if you can/will enhance the ideas and the design. 
> To be honest I am only implementing it because I want to use forrest for
> my own personal webpage (nothing more and nothing less) and I am sad
> that you are tired because YOU ARE the one that we need to make it
> really a success. 
> ....but I guess that is your personal decision and I respect it because I
> respect your work. 

Sorry, I think you misunderstood, and I think it's my fault :-/

I just said I'm tired not because of this discussion, but because I 
start working at 7:30 and go to bed at midnight and work on Sundays.

I mean that I would like to help, and that I agree with the discussion 
and your work on the views, and that the evolution from the current 
skins is what I want to see... but that unfortunately, as much as I 
would like to help, I'm too tired because of a lot of real-life work I 
have to do now.

Sorry for the confusion :-/

Nicola Ken Barozzi         
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)

View raw message