Jean-Vincent Drean wrote: > Hi XWikiers > > There are open question about the new skinx plugin, I'd like to > discuss about the first one : > http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/SkinExtensions#HUsage > "Should $xwiki.jsx.useFile("filename.js") work for files located on > the disk? This allows the same pull process to be used with files > located in the skin, without requiring SX documents and objects. I'd > say yes. Then, what should the URL look like? > /xwiki/bin/jsx/skins/albatross/somestyle.css is OK?" > > We definitely need this to be able to load some libraries > condditionaly, for example usersandgroups.js or lightbox.js. > I don't see the need for some special URLs, would it be a problem that > useFile() adds the result of a xwiki.getSkinFile() to the header ?
Wouldn't it be better to NOT have this kind of files on the filesystem? Instead, every optional thing would be a SX document. Some pros and cons: + they can be easily reused between skins + if they can't be reused between skins, then they clearly show a bad design of either the skin or the component + no need for two API methods + easy configuration for the cache policy and parsing option + grouping several files in a "component", not just some other files in the skin directory - upgrades are a bit harder, as it isn't enough to just unpack the new version and point it to the old database - too much granularity? Or is that a +? Right now I'm in favor of creating a new type of modules in our source repository, let's say xwiki-platform/xwiki-components, and move there things from the albatross skin. -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
