forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Williams <>
Subject Re: locationmap mounting [was: Re: [jira] Commented: (FOR-573) Provide locationmap mounting capability
Date Tue, 30 Aug 2005 00:47:15 GMT
On 8/29/05, Ross Gardler <> wrote:
> Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> > On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 22:39 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
> >
> >>Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I wonder how the daisy plugin is working from a new seed.
> >>
> >>The daisy plugin does not provide a locationmap, it is up to the user to
> >>do this in their project. This is Ok since the URL of the repository is
> >>dependant on the project rather than the plugin.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Actually that is really bad for views and a showstopper to use the lm
> > within views. Right now you have to do so much preparation that another
> > step is just overkill. The activation of views already needs more time
> > then building forrest.
> I have suggested, many times, that views should go into core in order to
> remove the multiple dependencies between your plugins. It is precisely
> because of this kind of complication that plugins are not supposed to
> have dependencies as argued by Nicola and myself in, for example,

I assume Ross mis-typed here "between *your* plugins" and really meant
"between view-related plugins" ;)

> >>I'd like to make it a config value and provide a plugin locationmap, but
> >>that is for the future.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Please, no offense,
> [Hmmm...  I'm bracing myself... I've written a reply and come back to
> remove the "reaction" parts... ]
> > but when you knew this, how could you suggest that I
> > should refactor the view resolver code with the locationmap?
> Please, do not get upset that someone does not have the foresight to
> anticipate every potential hiccup in the development of the project. The
> reality is that my not forseeing this particular hiccup is no worse than
> you not foreseeing it - I don't know every detail of the project, just
> as you do not.

Add me to the list of those without foresight -- I failed to think
through that the selectors wouldn't work for views, leading you to
have to implement locationmap actions.... wait a minute... now we have
a more robust locationmap... shortsightedness ain't so bad sometimes;)

> > If I check in my local version of views that means every project has to
> > copy and paste the internal.view locationmap. Not really copyless.
> I don't understand what the problem is. Forrest:views are going in core
> (eventually), therefore the locationmap settings for views should end up
> in the core Forrest locationmap not some plugin locationmap. What am I
> missing?
> In the meantime we have a number of potential solutions:
> Start a branch and move internal-views into core. This will remove all
> the dependencies between your plugins as we have always insisted must
> happen.
> If you don't want to move it to core yet then we can rely on users
> copying the locationmap into the project since the plugin is still in
> the whiteboard and so is not in a finished state.
> If this is too much for views to be enabled and you still insist on
> working with the internal plugin model then I'd recomend that we enhance
> the plugin loading code and, if necessary, the locationmap to mount a lm
> provided by a plugin.

I wonder if there's not another option.  It seems like your locations
wouldn't collide with anything so would there be any harm in just
putting them in the seed locationmap?  If so, you could at least put
them in there with comments wrapping them.
> Tell us what you need, we will help you achieve it.



View raw message