forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thorsten Scherler <thors...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [Proposal] No new features into skins (was Re: [jira] Closed: (FOR-320) )
Date Tue, 12 Jul 2005 23:10:22 GMT
On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 14:25 +0200, Cyriaque Dupoirieux wrote:
> Ross Gardler a écrit :
> 
> > Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 10:01 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
> >>
> >>> Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 10:08 +0200, Cyriaque Dupoirieux wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Thorsten, you closed the FOR-320 and do not apply the patch on skins.
> >>>>> Does that mean that we will not improve skins anymore ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I would not see any benefit from applying it to skins. ;-)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The patch already works for skins and there are many people already 
> >>> using skins. Views are not ready to replace skins yet (we will need 
> >>> pelt in views before that can happen). Please reopen the issue.
> >>
> I will soon be on this improvment, but I don't understand what is the 
> impact of the project.skin property now that templates directly generate 
> XHTML.
> Thorsten, how do you imagine to be multi-skins vith views ?

For now we can use a new forrest.properties property for that. 

I added in http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=215900&view=rev 
#views
project.view-defaultView=default.fv

Now you can add to you project specific forrest.properties
project.view-defaultView=pelt.fv

...and then follow
http://forrest.apache.org/docs_0_80/howto/howto-view-dsl.html

to develop pelt based on views.

Then you will end up with 1. css-file and 1. pelt.fv. 

We will then add it to the view and we can choose 2 different skins
(default and pelt).

> (That is how do we manage templates, how do we manage fv files
>     Maybe use of different directories to store templates ?
>     Maybe default.skinname.fv files ?
> )

If we come to the point where we have views in the core and "view
plugins" that will be nearly the same. With a small extension that the
user can then as well define which views.xhtml plugin (s)he wants. 

Like
project.views.xhtml.plugin=org.apache.forrest.plugin.output.viewHelper.xhtml

Only that we need to move views into the core to activate that.

Anyway if you can provide the css and view for pelt that would be more
then great.

:)

salu2

> 
> Regards,
> Cyriaque,
> 
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> You are as well admin and can reopen the issue (read on before you do).
> >
> >
> > Yes I know. But I don't want to go stamping on what you already did 
> > without understanding your reasoning, you never know I might agree 
> > with you when you explain it to me ;-)
> >
> >> Adding *new features* to skins *do not* help to make views ready to
> >> replace skins. Did you thought about that? 
> >
> >
> > I agree that spending the time adding new features is not a good 
> > thing. However this patch already exists. as I said in my mail I agree 
> > that it would need to be made configurable, I'm not sure anyone will 
> > bother with that, I know I won't). Like I said in my original mail, 
> > all I am suggesting is leaving it open so that if a user wants this 
> > feature we can point them at the patch, or better still they will find 
> > it without asking questions on the lists. If the issue is closed they 
> > are unlikely to find it.
> >
> >> ...and we *do not* need pelt in views, that is not true. Why do you mean
> >> that?
> >
> >
> > If you want people to adopt views I strongly recommend that we have a 
> > view that looks the same as pelt. Look at the number of sites on our 
> > example sites that use it. Most of those sites will will not switch to 
> > views unless at the point of switching their site looks the same as it 
> > does not. Then some will start playing with views and customising 
> > their sites look and feel because they will discover how easy it is.
> >
> > Those who are not using pelt are, in most cases, using a customised 
> > version of it. If you provide a view that looks like pelt it will be 
> > much easier for them to recreate their own site in views. Therefore, 
> > they are more likely to migrate to views.
> >
> > If you do not provide this migration route most existing users will 
> > stick with the deprecated skin for quite some time. There is no 
> > motivation to move from it since they are perfectly happy with what 
> > they have. The fact that it is cool, whizz bang technology and really 
> > easy to customise is irrelevant if they are happy with what they have.
> >
> > If we want to bring our existing user base to views we have to make it 
> > very easy for them. This means, in my opinion, that we need a view 
> > that looks exactly like pelt.
> >
> >> Anyway I am -1 to reopen this issue and apply it to skins because that
> >> means we have to add yet another property to the skinconf,...
> >
> >
> > I said reopen, not necessarily apply it, I agree with David that it 
> > would need to be configurable before we applied it and that involves 
> > spending time on it, which I agree is not a good thing, our dev time 
> > should go into views. However, the fact that we are deprecating the 
> > skin does not mean we should put contributions in a place where they 
> > will not be seen by existing users.
> >
> > Ross
> >
> >
-- 
thorsten

"Together we stand, divided we fall!" 
Hey you (Pink Floyd)


Mime
View raw message