Le 01/04/2011 02:49, ryan weaver a écrit :
My negative response to the change was that the inclusion of the
"Bundle" portion makes it clear what these strings are referring to
(the inconsistency is less of a problem for me). To steal Jordi's example:
Resource reference:
@AcmeBlogBundle/Resources/foo.bar (old)
@AcmeBlog/Resources/foo.bar (current)
=> src/Acme/BlogBundle/Resources/foo.bar
=> app/Resources/AcmeBlog/foo.bar
The "AcmeBlogBundle" string is very communicative that we're talking
about a path that lives inside a bundle, which is a well-defined idea.
I'm afraid that a user will see "@AcmeBlog" and not have it trigger in
their mind that we're referring to a bundle.
This still occurs according to some recent questions on #symfony.
Granted we refer to them directly much less in symfony1, but we
required that all plugins end in "Plugin" - a requirement that never
really bothered me.
Like many others, I have an opinion, but will likely survive either way :)
--
Christophe | Stof
--
If you want to report a vulnerability issue on symfony, please send it to
security at symfony-project.com
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "symfony developers" 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/symfony-devs?hl=en
