On 11/14/06, James Adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'd much prefer it if I personally > could focus on the development of the engines plugin, and leave the > actual engine implementations to others in the community. What do you > think?
I think that is a great idea! > Also, with the upcoming release of Rails 1.2, the distinction between > engines and plugins will hopefully basically disappear. Now that I > have an 'official' mechanism to control the order that plugins are > loaded, there's no need for Engines.start, and all the features that > the engines plugin provides can be made available to any plugin that > needs them. This might result an erosion of meaning for the word > 'engine' as applied to any particular chunk of shareable code - we'd > just have plugins that make use of engine-plugin features. The > 'pluginaweek' guys have the right idea - to an extent at least. I > still feel that every 'feature' that the engines plugin provides makes > sense as a coherent, single package, and they got a few things quite > wrong in their recent criticism - see my reply on rails-engines.org if > you're interested. What exactly is happening in Rails 1.2. Are Rails' plugins essentially evolving into full functioning engines? Thanks, Peter _______________________________________________ engine-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rails-engines.org/listinfo.cgi/engine-users-rails-engines.org
