On 7/25/01 2:34 AM, "Kasper Nielsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We should make the layout pluggable, this way people can experience with
> different layouts, without to much trouble.
> And when we get more experience with how people develop applications with
> Turbine, we can have a experienced/simple/Turbine4 layout
>
> Lets put a setting in build.properties
> tdk.layout= (standard/simple/turbine3 or whatever we end up with)
I do not want to encourage pluggable layouts, I think that's a bad
idea. You might at well have no structure at all. I think the whole point
is to have something standard so that when someone walks into a turbine
project there is some familiarity. I think that supporting some properties
that allow migration toward the standard, but in this case I think that
letting the layout be anything is probably not a good idea and would
only be required if we couldn't come to a consensus.
If it came down to that I definitely wouldn't want to openly promote
the idea of being able to have any layout you want. I think pluggable
layouts are a bad idea.
> - Kasper
>
>> |- build.properties
>> |- build.xml
>> |
>> |-- docs (for non generated docs, generated output won't be stored)
>> |-- lib (jars for code not provided by the TDK)
>> |-- templates
>> |-- resources
>> |-- src
>> | |-- conf
>> | |-- java
>> |
>> `-- xdocs
>>
>> Hopefully this will start some discussion and in a couple of days we
>> can arrive at some standard that we can document and promote.
>>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
jvz.
Jason van Zyl
http://tambora.zenplex.org
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
http://jakarta.apache.org/alexandria
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
