Gary Shewan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 17 Mar 2006, at 16:19, Piers Cawley wrote: > >> "Kevin Kubasik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> Just a note, I found that when attempting to update to the >>> latestTrunk, rev 915 breaks (it can't seem to add the new blogs >>> tablecorrectly) 914 is good though. It seems to me that a multiblog >>> branchshould be handled that way, in its own branch, not in the >>> trunk(although the comment seems to imply that it is being done in >>> abranch, maybe im just SVN illiterate) >> >> It's staying in the trunk -- the comment about the branch was from my >> local SVK based repository which I'd not edited out. >> >> What errors were you getting when you tried to run the migrations? >> Could you send me a the relevant log section? >> >> -- >> Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> http://www.bofh.org.uk/ >> _______________________________________________ >> Typo-list mailing list >> Typo-list@rubyforge.org >> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/typo-list > > Sigh, well that's me not upgrading in trunk. Multi blog support is > bloat for those of us running Typo on single sites. I think it's a > bad move to keep this in trunk. If you want me to throw a penny in > I'd say split it now. The initial attraction of Typo because it was > lean. Why keep multi blog in trunk when not everyone wants it? It's > screaming out for a separate branch. > > God I hate bloat.
Have you even read the patch? The reason that the current changes have gone into the trunk is because they're paving the way to *removing* bloat. In fact, they have already done so by eliminating the settings table and a bunch of structural code to manage it. You could think of r914 as a refactoring of the config object if you prefer. I have no desire to run multiple typo blogs on my site, but a blog object makes a lot of things that I do want to do a good deal easier to manage. I have every intention of making it so that the single blog case is at least as efficient as the (so far hypothetical) multiblog case, but I also need somewhere to stash a bunch of structural currently implemented in controllers that really doesn't belong there. That place is the blog object. I've not benchmarked it, but I'm willing to be that the new blog object is at least as efficient as the old Configuration and Setting objects. -- Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.bofh.org.uk/ _______________________________________________ Typo-list mailing list Typo-list@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/typo-list
