+1 (and we might as well add 1.4.2 as well/instead :-)
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Marius wrote:
> Guys,
>
> This has been added not so long ago, and I am aware that I should
> express my perspective on this back then as now it might be too late.
> IMHO LiftRules or other Lift parts except the JsArtifacts and maybe
> ResourceServer should not even be aware of the underlying JS framework
> thus the JQuery name in LiftRules is very unsound to me.
>
>
> Here is other proposal of keeping things decoupled:
>
> .
> We currently have JQueryArtifacts which holds the JQuery
> implementation.
>
> We add in the JsArtifacts this:
>
> trait JsArtifacts {
> ...
> def version
> }
>
> then
>
> case class JQueryArtifacts1_3_2 extends JQueryArtifacts {
> def version = "1.3.2-min"
> }
>
> case class JQueryArtifacts1_4_1 extends JQueryArtifacts {
> def version = "1.4.1-min"
> }
>
> Then to select one or another we use the existent mechanism:
>
> LiftRules.jsArtifacts = JQueryArtifacts1_3_2 // by default and people
> can change this easily
>
>
> then in ResourceServer we can easily make the version selection.
>
>
> In this way LiftRules has no idea about JQuery, YUI etc and it
> doesn't need to. it is only about feeding different implementations of
> JsArtifact.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Br's,
> Marius
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Lift" group.
> To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
