El lun, 05-06-2006 a las 13:35 +0100, Ross Gardler escribió: > David Crossley wrote: > > Thorsten Scherler wrote: > > > >>David Crossley escribi??: > > ... > > >>>BTW, i see that the dispatcher copy of resources.xmap does not > >>>use the locationmap at all, whereas the main one does. > >> > >>We (I think Ross mainly did it) updated the xmap and extracted the > >>matches to lm recently. The dispatcher resources.xmap did not got > >>adopted after this changes. > > > > > > I meant that if someone is investigating the issue, > > then please work from the main copy. > > > > I have noticed a trend lately that when people are > > helping to investigate core issues, they are considering > > dispatcher only. We still have skins as default. > > It is worrying that a plugin (i.e. the dispatcher) has a complete copy > of resources.xmap (and others) rather than overriding any matches that > are necessary to make the plugin work. > > I raised this issue a very long time ago, way back in views 1. At that > time the justification was that the dispatcher (then views) would become > part of core, so I let it drop. However, now that it seems the > dispatcher is to remain a plugin this has become an important issues. >
Yeah, you are right I can remember the thread. > There should be zero code duplication between sitemaps in plugins and > sitemaps in core. totally agree. That is why I talked about resource-core.xmap and resource-skin|dispatcher.xmap. Since neither skin nor dispatcher specific stuff stuff should be in the core that means we actually can simply extend the core (no need to override anything). > The plugin framework has been built in such a way that > this should never be necessary. We have he ability to override selected > matches and that is all that we should be doing. We should try not to force a plugin to override skin specific matches. Extending is way easier but means to have a *real* small core. salu2 -- thorsten "Together we stand, divided we fall!" Hey you (Pink Floyd)
