You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@roller.apache.org by Glen Mazza <gl...@gmail.com> on 2014/06/28 23:24:47 UTC
blog-level custom page model classes option in Roller
Hi Team, our per-blog Settings page, at the bottom, has this section:
Global Admin-only settings: Comma-separated list of custom page model
classes to be loaded for this weblog:
(Multiline edit box to enter these classes)
What is the use case for this? Our user's guide doesn't explain it.
For the comparatively few skilled and inclined enough to add custom page
model classes today, might they end up hacking Roller directly anyway to
code this functionality in (avoiding a need to configure this manually
for each blog) while adding whatever other bells and whistles they want
to the code? Compared to earlier versions, Roller 5.1 code is pretty
easy to modify. If still useful we can keep this option on our Settings
page, but if next to no one would be using it I wouldn't mind removing
it to simplify that page.
Thanks,
Glen
Re: blog-level custom page model classes option in Roller
Posted by Dave <sn...@gmail.com>.
+1
I don't think this type of setting belongs in the UI.
- Dave
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Glen Mazza <gl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Team, our per-blog Settings page, at the bottom, has this section:
>
> Global Admin-only settings: Comma-separated list of custom page model
> classes to be loaded for this weblog:
> (Multiline edit box to enter these classes)
>
> What is the use case for this? Our user's guide doesn't explain it. For
> the comparatively few skilled and inclined enough to add custom page model
> classes today, might they end up hacking Roller directly anyway to code
> this functionality in (avoiding a need to configure this manually for each
> blog) while adding whatever other bells and whistles they want to the code?
> Compared to earlier versions, Roller 5.1 code is pretty easy to modify.
> If still useful we can keep this option on our Settings page, but if next
> to no one would be using it I wouldn't mind removing it to simplify that
> page.
>
> Thanks,
> Glen
>
>