On 10-12-06 07:48 AM, Trevor Parscal wrote:
On 12/6/10 3:18 AM, Daniel Friesen wrote:
It's not part of distribution, but the new
installer's ability to point
out extensions and allow you to install them from the installer was
pointed out. However generally each skin doesn't have it's own set of
configuration (vector does, but generally as an ideal having a bunch of
skins that are nothing but a separate theme for the site should not
require special configuration of each one of them) so there isn't really
much use for sharing configuration infrastructure. Additionally, if we
do add an autoloader for the new style of skin there's not really any
point to having the installer point out skins. If they're in a spot the
installer can find them, they'll already be autoloaded anyways.
Or you can just add support for a visual interface for controlling skin
settings. Wordpress does this kind of thing by having a script that just
registers things, but we could do it in a variety of ways. The point
here is, configuring skins isn't such a bad idea, it helps solve
problems where people want the same skin with just a little tweaking,
reducing forking, which helps concentrate efforts on a single distribution.
- Trevor
Sure, that's an even better point. If we DO have some sort of skin
configuration we'll probably want a nice visual interface that people
can understand, and if possible, we'll probably want to integrate some
of it into the preferences system so that users can customize some of
what they see to.
Anything we build for configuring an extension is going to be
preference-less and geared towards configuring config vars and actual
complex config settings used by extensions. Extensions and Skins have
differing ideals for visual interfaces.
~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [
http://daniel.friesen.name]
--
~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [
http://daniel.friesen.name]