Den 21. aug. 2008 kl. 10.06 skrev Thorsten Scherler:


Is this dependency acceptable?

IMO yes, since the plugin is very small and thought a infrastructure
code. Like you describe the alternative to implement it in the sitemap
is cumbersome to maintain.

Are there other opinions? Do we need a vote before we tie ourselves to this dependency?

How should it/can it be formalised?

Not sure what you mean?

Whether it is possible to formalize the dependency, such that if the pdf plugin is specified, forrest will automatically also include other plugins the pdf plugin is dependent on. But if I remember past discussions correctly, this isn't possible yet.

At least we need to update the seeds to include the
o.a.f.p.output.inputModule as well as the pdf plugin (new seeds only
include the pdf plugin).

As I understand it you commit to the fresh-site files
(skins/dispatcher) and the cron is doing the rest.

Ok, I'll update the fresh-site file.


Thanks for looking into this Sjur.

Thanks for the feedback.

Best regards,