#rails-contrib:
13:47 < nextangler> I think we're just killing dynamic scaffold, actually
13:48 < nextangler> the non-rest static scaffold has already been killed
13:48 < kevinclark> ah
13:49 < kevinclark> so, that decides that ticket, but in general
13:49 < kevinclark> can we get a place to collect patches for things that core
isn't going to maintain, but might be wrapped into an
extraction?
13:49 < kevinclark> though I know the # of reports is already dizzying
13:49 < nextangler> I think we should just treat that as regular patches. Like
the pagination thing.
13:50 < nextangler> Extraction plugins should live at something like
plugins/legacy on the official rails svn
13:50 < kevinclark> ah, we can just change the "Component" setting to plugins
On 5/22/07, Kevin Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are some patches in the pipeline like [Ticket
> 7584](http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/7584) which modify
> functionality that is going to be extracted to a plugin. I suggest we
> tag these 'pluginize' and make a report so people extracting things
> like scaffolding can check there for updates, but the core doesn't
> need to deal with them.
>
> How do people feel about that? Should the tickets be closed, as well
> as tagged? I'm not sure the best way to keep those tickets out of the
> patch count but still indicate that it hasn't been dealt with.
>
> --
> Kevin Clark
> http://glu.ttono.us
>
--
Kevin Clark
http://glu.ttono.us
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails: Core" 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/rubyonrails-core?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
