On 9/6/06, John Clayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I guess we could keep a plugin repository using subversion and keep > that up to date, but we'd then have to suck changes into our working > SCM, darcs. Which might not be too too bad.
No different than if you could get the engines as a tar ball. > They are. The only thing that bothers me is that we are looking for a > way to host multiple sites on one physical app, which we are thinking > of deploying as an engine to a bunch of application stubs. I'm not > sure we're using Engines in the right way here, but it would probably > beat dynamically switching the database connection, etc. Do the separate sites have anything shared in the database? If they are sharing the same database then engines might not be the way to go. If they really are distinct apps (eg online stores with separate owners) then engines could be a great way to go. I think the most important things about engines is choosing the right time to use them. Peter _______________________________________________ engine-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rails-engines.org/listinfo.cgi/engine-users-rails-engines.org
