On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:13 AM, Arthus Erea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> On Sep 29, 2008, at 10:06 PM, Ali B. wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 4:53 AM, Arthus Erea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>>
>> Andrew and I talked about this on IRC and came to this suggestion:
>>
>> 1. Move admin and installer to /system/themes.
>> 2. Rename admin to 'monolith' and installer to some code-name we
>> decide upon.
>> 3. Introduce a new <type> field into theme.xml, which accepts 3 values
>>        a. 'site' – used for public display; default
>>        b. 'installer' – used for the installer
>>        c. 'admin' – used for the admin
>> 4. Create theme.xml for our themes and update accordingly.
>>
>> This serves a couple of useful aims:
>> A) Ensures consistency of structure across /user and /system – all
>> themes are in */themes
>
>
> The suggestions are based on the assumption that the admin and the
> installer are themes. Which, IMHO, is not correct.
> The term 'themes' is given what controls the look and feel for the front
> end. The admin and installer are sites, not themes. Thus, having system
> front-end themes and the admin/installer sites in the same place would
> result in an inconsistency, rather. This perspective also tells me that
> having a "type" field in the xml would not make any sense either.
>
>
>
> I'm afraid you're incorrect there. They _are_ themes.
>
> They implement the theme system and use theme logic. Not to mention, they
> really are themes in the technical sense. Themes are used to render
> presentational logic–which both the admin and installer are.
>
Admin does not "implement" the theme system. The theme system is not just
the Theme class. So no.

For the technical proof, please look to line 67 of
> http://trac.habariproject.org/habari/browser/trunk/htdocs/system/classes/adminhandler.php
> .
>
> B) Allows for the ultimate plug-ability of alternative admin (or even
>> installer!) themes. – eventually
>
>
> On the top of my head, I can't see why you can't accomplish that --if that
> that feature is implemented in core-- without moving these sites along.
>
>
> I'm not sure how you would do that... presently the only ways are somewhat
> hacky and rely upon plugins.
>
> By the way, what "sites" do you mean? We're not moving any sites....
>

Admin and themes are. Or at least, this is how they're named. They have 2
different purpose, each is different from the front-end's.

>
> C) Potentially allows for the controlled activation of different admin
>> themes – you could switch between different themes for the admin at
>> will, just like for the public site.
>
>
> Also can be implemented in core without moving the sites (see my previous
> notes).
>
> Not only admin and installer are sites, but they are obviously 2 seperate,
> different sites actually. And it makes perfect sense to me that they are
> both in seperate folders, in /system.
>
>
> Different sites? I'm not really sure where you get that... they're both
> interfaces (along with the public front-end) to the same site.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Ali B / dmondark
> http://www.awhitebox.com
>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 29, 2008, at 9:38 PM, Andrew da Silva wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > I was going to suggest not touching the user/ ... but then devs might
>> > get confused?
>> >
>> > On Sep 29, 9:36 pm, Arthus Erea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> I don't like the idea of reducing unnecessary complication,
>> >> especially
>> >> when it comes to the user themes directory.
>> >>
>> >> I don't know about you, but the URL 'user/themes/user/foo' seems ripe
>> >> for confusion...
>> >>
>> >> My question is: why? What practical aim does this serve to users to
>> >> justify this added confusion?
>> >>
>> >> What would be the problem with simply putting the admin and installer
>> >> themes in system/themes/admin – I think we can safely assume nobody
>> >> is
>> >> going to name a theme "admin" – and if they do we should probably
>> >> assume it is meant as a replacement for the admin interface.
>> >>
>> >> On Sep 29, 2008, at 9:25 PM, Andrew da Silva wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> Clutter in AdminHandler got me thinking...
>> >>
>> >>> Since admin and installer are themes, why are they still in
>> >>> independent folders?
>> >>
>> >>> Sure, admin and installer in system/themes could be troublesome, but
>> >>> would it?
>> >>> We control what goes in system/themes... no risk of overwriting.
>> >>> Only problem I can foresee is user/themes/admin and installer...
>> >>
>> >>> In the end, I think we should remove those two folders from
>> >>> system, it
>> >>> makes no sense anymore.
>> >>
>> >>> If installer is considered "administration" material, maybe we could
>> >>> create...
>> >>
>> >>> system/themes/admin/installer
>> >>> system/themes/admin/default
>> >>> system/themes/user/k2
>> >>> system/themes/user/mzingi
>> >>> system/themes/user/charcoal
>> >>
>> >>> And replicate in the user folder..
>> >>
>> >>> user/themes/admin/...
>> >>> user/themes/user/...
>> >>
>> >>> This way Habari would mainly be an API completely customizable
>> >>> from A
>> >>> to Z...
>> > >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
>


-- 
Ali B / dmondark
http://www.awhitebox.com

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/habari-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to