Re: proposal: consolodate examples/standard & examples/simple

[Grant Smith]

+1 for consolidation, yet with separate areas for non-jsCookMenu-cluttered stuff. Sean Schofield wrote: Can we get a few more +1's for this? sean On 7/7/05, Bill Dudney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: yes now the cobwebs are clearing... if we get agreement I'd be up for getting rid of standard and making a JSCookMenu example. TTFN, -bd- On Jul 7, 2005, at 2:20 PM, Sean Schofield wrote: A little background ... I created the simple examples because they had way less HTML cluttering them up because they were not running inside of menus, etc. We still needed an example that showed off JSCookMenu so people argued that we should keep the old examples around for this purpose. When I did the reorg, I created an svn:external for the src in simple so that it points to the standard. So the source code is *exactly* the same. I would like to stop maintaining the two sets of examples as you propose. When we create a new component nobody is going to want to add it to both examples and so they will get hopelessly out of sync over time. I would suggest dropping standard examples and adding a few fancy JSCookMenu examples, etc. to simple (that show off what standard was trying to do.) That will take a little bit of time so we need a volunteer (if we can get agreement.) sean On 7/7/05, Bill Dudney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi All, It appears that the code in examples/standard and the code in simple/ standard is the same. Any objections to getting rid of one or the other? TTFN, -bd- .