After hearing both sides of the argument, I could really go both ways on this.
Do I think its _dangerous_ to put sass files in the public directory? No... they are still static assets, and the information they contain is really nothing above and beyond what's provided in the rendered CSS. Do I think they _should_ be in the public directory? No. I think it duplicates content already available through the css files. The only real argument I see for putting them in the public directory is the Firefox plugin... I don't see any real value from this aside from the "cool" factor. One more note.. my understanding is you can change the storage location via a setting in the environment.rb file. So the good news is, both sides are going to get what they want. The only question is... what's the default going to be. On Feb 2, 2007, at 3:09 PM, svenax wrote: > > Anyone else want to chime in? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haml" group. 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/haml?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
