Don't think moving them to content_object should be too difficult.There is little bit of refactoring for locating, loading blocks but not too much from what I have seen.
So far the only app I know that uses blocks is the portal.
Le 12.04.2011 16:10, Systho a écrit :
I think those blocks are so much related to the content_object that they can't live in the repository application.It's not if they can do half of their work without the content_object but are fully operational with it ; they totally useless without the content_object.Maybe I've misunderstood your last remark but I can't find a way to make those block cope when the content_object is not there.I agree that making packages out of those block is a bit overkill but does somebody know how difficult would that be to move those blocks to the [main] content_object they are linked to and make that content_object depdends on another if needed ?That might be a general solution for the latest pieces of core which still depends on content objectsIf nobody knows, may someone explain me quickly the dynamics of blocks ? are they only useful to the home application ?Systho Le 12/04/2011 16:00, Laurent Opprecht a écrit :Right some blocks - possibly linker - depends on more than one content object - streaming I believe is in the same situation. In this case it cannot really be part of one content_object package unless you want to make the content object package dependent of another - which may or may not work, I would need to have a deeper look at linker to answer this question. The "perfect" solution would be to make those blocks packages themselves. But I would tend to say this is too much work for the benefits - at least for now. On the other hand I think that the package structure should be as orthogonal as possible. Which means adding blocks to the content object package structure. So I think we can leave those blocks where they are - in the repository - and let's them cope when an object is not available.Le 12.04.2011 15:48, Systho a écrit :Actually some blocks depends on more than 1 content object. (Linker depends on Link & RSS feed).Would that work if we make Link content_object contain the block and depends on RSSFeed content object ?(I'm just asking because repo is not really my field) Systho Le 12/04/2011 15:41, Laurent Opprecht a écrit :Make blocks a component of content object packages. So that they can be bundled with their content object when possible.Le 12.04.2011 15:32, Philippe Van Eerdenbrugghe a écrit :Here I come again with my damn cyclic dependencies ^^almost all the classes under the path "repository\php\blocks\type\*" have dependencies to content_objects.Does someone have an idea to break it ?For those who don't care : cyclic dependencies are preventing a modular application, so as long as we haven't break all those links, we can't download a small core package and cherrypick the additional packages. Cyclic depdencies also make the upgrade process incredibly hard.Systho _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@lists.chamilo.org http://lists.chamilo.org/listinfo/dev-- ____________________________________ Meilleures salutations Laurent Opprecht chat: laurent.oppre...@gmail.com blog: http://ciel.unige.ch/ _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@lists.chamilo.org http://lists.chamilo.org/listinfo/dev
-- ____________________________________ Meilleures salutations Laurent Opprecht chat: laurent.oppre...@gmail.com blog: http://ciel.unige.ch/
<<attachment: laurent_opprecht.vcf>>
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@lists.chamilo.org http://lists.chamilo.org/listinfo/dev
