Maybe it could be a separate module, and both security and ?? compile against that.
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi! > > All the ViewConfig stuff has not much to do with 'Configuration', right? > It's more related to 'View'. > > Kind of the configuration for the View, but still only related to the View > stuff. > As I've understood we only need it in core at all because some Security > stuff references it as well, right? > > > But it's actually more view.config but config.view, isn't? > > Fear people who look at our 'config' API/SPI will get confused by all > those unrelated classes. > > Should we move it? Or does it fit well enough and I just don't get it? > > > LieGrue, > strub > >
