Torsten Curdt wrote: > > > > So we could: > > > > > > 1) leave everything like it is :-( > > > 2) have another blocks directory under scratchpad > > > 3) have a single blocks directory and mark and exclude > scratchpad stuff > > > > 4) have a scratchpad directory in every block that needs it. > > > > I'm in favour of 3) > > excellent - same here :-) > > > We could have a new block "scrachpad-block" (a), append "-scratch" to > > the name e.g. "new-stuff-scratch-block" (b), or just add a comment in > > modules.xml saying it is "pre-alpha quality" (c). Either one is > > fine. > > <blocks> > <fop include="true"/> > <myteststuff include="false" > > scratch="true" > quality="pre-alpha" > unstable="true" > stable="false" > /> > </blocks> > > I'd be in favor of "unstable" or "stable" > > > A single scratchpad block would be nice for small additions > > while big ones could opt for "c". > > aggreed. > > <blocks> > <fop include="true"/> > ... > > <!-- the following blocks are marked unstable and should be > considered being pre-alpha quality. Their API might change > without notice --> > <myteststuff include="false" unstable="true"/> > <scratchpad include="false" unstable="true"/> > </blocks> > > Ok?
Please, don't use unstable="true" or unstable="false", what about status="stable" and status="unstable". This is interpreted in a stylesheet anyway, so please make it more readable for a casual user. Carsten --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
