forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thorsten Scherler <thors...@apache.org>
Subject Re: svn commit: r520650 - in /forrest/trunk/whiteboard/plugins: org.apache.forrest.plugin.input.doap/ org.apache.forrest.plugin.internal.dispatcher/ org.apache.forrest.plugin.output.solr/ org.apache.forrest.themes.core/themes/common/fo/ org.apache.forrest....
Date Wed, 21 Mar 2007 10:09:50 GMT
Hmm, since we decided to change the name of tiles to panels (see the
thread on dev) I did expect that this commit would have addressed this
issue as well.

Let me explain why the commit is not really how we want it.

On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 15:50 +0000, Ross Gardler wrote: 
> Why is common-fo.vt.xml in html directory rather than the fo directory?

This should go into the "panels" directory of the theme directory since
it is an "old" tiles.

Panels do not care which contracts they contain. Meaning that for
internal processing in the dispatcher pelt-css.vt.xml will not be
treated different then common-fo.vt.xml. 

The fo/css in the naming only shows which aggregation of contract and
hook (in short panel) are addressed.

Panels do not belong in the html nor in the fo nor in css nor in ....
directory but in a directory on its on like e.g.
themes/pelt/panels
themes/common/panels

salu2

On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 10:49 +0100, Cyriaque Dupoirieux wrote:
> le 21/03/2007 10:31 Ross Gardler a écrit :
> > Cyriaque Dupoirieux wrote:
> >> le 21/03/2007 00:17 rgardler@apache.org a écrit :
> >>> Author: rgardler
> >>> Date: Tue Mar 20 16:17:47 2007
> >>> New Revision: 520650
> >>>
> >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=520650
> >>> Log:
> >>> Enable *.vt.xml files to be located in the correct directory within 
> >>> themes.
> >>>   
> >> [...SNIP...]
> >>
> >
> > Also a good solution.
> >
> > I didn't want to mess with the structure of the pattern as I'm not 
> > familiar enough with dispatcher to know what side effects this may 
> > have. If you think it is safe to do this, then I agree bother are 
> > better than the current implementation.
> >
> > I prefer the first option.
> So do I.
> I will make the update, may you check for the doap plugin please, I am 
> not sure to be able to test it...
> 
> Salutations,
> Cyriaque,
> 
> >
> > Ross
> >
> >
-- 
Thorsten Scherler                                 thorsten.at.apache.org
Open Source Java & XML                consulting, training and solutions


Mime
View raw message