Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
For the portal block, which I still don't know that much about, I would assume that it would become a number of components with some kind of dependency description for each and a block with sitemap functionality and a list on what components it depend on.
Hopefully Pier can tell more about his ideas about component handling. My main interest is the sitemap part of the equation.
/Daniel
Hmmm. If blocks go down the path of only supporting sitemaps then I guess I'm not too interested, since none of the stuff I care about fits into that.
I had the same reaction at first, and then it accurred to me that if we went down the path of having optional code and optional sitemap in blocks, not only people are likely to keep them separate (ending up with 'sitemap blocks' and 'code blocks') but that would force us to reinvent the maven wheel for code blocks.
I'm not actually 100% of how this separation is going to work in real life, but I'm willing to sit back and watch how far along we can go while keeping things separate, because making them unified I fear was one of the reasons why blocks have been so hard of a problem to attack.
At the end, we might end up understanding that we need to reinvent the maven wheel, but I really hope not.
So, I suggest you to follow me in being a little more hopeful about it, sit back and watch the show and just trust the community in its collective wisdom.
-- Stefano.
