Thorsten Scherler wrote: > Brian M Dube wrote: > > David Crossley wrote: > > > I am not yet clear about your main aim. Is it to move > > > the existing functionality out of the core and leave it > > > at that (a legacy system)? Or is it to create a framework > > > as described above which would enable future development > > > of skins functionality as well as dispatcher. > > > > If community support of skins is questionable, then a flexible framework > > seems to me the way to go. > > I do not see the need nor the work force to have to different > skinning/theming frameworks. > > I see the dispatcher as successor of skins which should be moved to a > plugin, but not 2 different frameworks.
Hang on. Last time that we talked about this, we were quite clear that skins could remain. See the document referred to earlier in this thread and its linked email discussion. It is good reading and leads to other useful stuff. > > > Not sure what to do about the different skins. > > > There would be a similar discussion in the archives about > > > when the Dispatcher work established the f.a.o.themes.core > > > plugin. > > > > > Let us continue to express our needs for a little > > > while on this dev list, before launching into the > > > actual development. > > > > Fair enough. For one of my projects I tested a modification to the > > Forrest build files that leaves out (unused) skin resources when > > building dispatcher sites. It would be great if this case is handled > > when skins move out of core. > > Regarding this files they should be provided by the plugin itself in the > jar. Some of these resources are copying the potential project-based things like images and css, so they would not be provided by the plugin. See the messages towards the end of 'forrest site' just before Cocoon starts. > I can help a wee bit but my time is limited ATM since my 2 girls are 3 > days old. Good luck to you all. Looking forward to the improvements in Forrest's Gallery plugin ;-) -David
