Re: Using the xhtml2 plugin as final dispatcher plugin

[David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>]

Ross Gardler wrote:
> Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> >Tim Williams escribi??:
> >>Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> >>
> >>>how should we proceed for cleaning up v2?
> >>>
> >>>I will soon commit a first working version of the DispatcherTransformer.
> >>>That means that 75% of the pipelines in structurer/themer will be gone.
> >>>I would like to use this opportunity and create the final internal
> >>>plugin (dispatcher) which should replace skins and old views (incl. v2).
> >>>I want to write this plugin from scratch (meaning to add pipeline by
> >>>pipeline).
> >>>
> >>>This plugin should contain the structurer and themer as components but
> >>>not anymore as 2 separate plugins. Further since the markup of contracts
> >>>have changed I want to use the opportunity to base the dispatcher
> >>>internally completely on xhtml2. Meaning all contracts are expecting
> >>>xhtml2 and *not* xdocs as source format.
> >>
> >>So can we just clear out the xhtml2 plugin and use that?  That's
> >>really what it was intended for Views+XHTML2 IIRC.  I think it's safe
> >>to remove most everything in there except the xhtml2_subset.xml file. 
> >>Everything else in there is OBE.
> >>
> >>I'd personally rather see that, rather than YAVRP (yet another
> >>view-related plugin) ;)
> >
> >I agree with Tim and would start to 
> >a) clean the xhtml2 from v1
> >b) starting to add refactored structurer (*.fv) and contracts (*.ft) to
> >the xhtml2 plugin
> >c) removing v2 when finished the migration.
> >
> >wdyt?
> 
> Since you don't say it is lazy consensus...
> 
> +1

The default is lazy consensus. So just get on with the job
unless someone asks to stop, review, perhaps revert.

-David

Re: Using the xhtml2 plugin as final dispatcher plugin

[Thorsten Scherler <th...@apache.org>]

El mar, 13-12-2005 a las 11:42 +1100, David Crossley escribió:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
> > Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> > >Tim Williams escribi??:
> > >>Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>how should we proceed for cleaning up v2?
> > >>>
> > >>>I will soon commit a first working version of the DispatcherTransformer.
> > >>>That means that 75% of the pipelines in structurer/themer will be gone.
> > >>>I would like to use this opportunity and create the final internal
> > >>>plugin (dispatcher) which should replace skins and old views (incl. v2).
> > >>>I want to write this plugin from scratch (meaning to add pipeline by
> > >>>pipeline).
> > >>>
> > >>>This plugin should contain the structurer and themer as components but
> > >>>not anymore as 2 separate plugins. Further since the markup of contracts
> > >>>have changed I want to use the opportunity to base the dispatcher
> > >>>internally completely on xhtml2. Meaning all contracts are expecting
> > >>>xhtml2 and *not* xdocs as source format.
> > >>
> > >>So can we just clear out the xhtml2 plugin and use that?  That's
> > >>really what it was intended for Views+XHTML2 IIRC.  I think it's safe
> > >>to remove most everything in there except the xhtml2_subset.xml file. 
> > >>Everything else in there is OBE.
> > >>
> > >>I'd personally rather see that, rather than YAVRP (yet another
> > >>view-related plugin) ;)
> > >
> > >I agree with Tim and would start to 
> > >a) clean the xhtml2 from v1
> > >b) starting to add refactored structurer (*.fv) and contracts (*.ft) to
> > >the xhtml2 plugin
> > >c) removing v2 when finished the migration.
> > >
> > >wdyt?
> > 
> > Since you don't say it is lazy consensus...
> > 
> > +1
> 
> The default is lazy consensus. So just get on with the job
> unless someone asks to stop, review, perhaps revert.

Actually I had a look on the involved tasks and IMO it is easier to just
copy the xhtml2 specific stuff (documents, samples and stylesheet) to
the dispatcher then the other way around. 

I think it is better to "implode" the plugins, meaning to use v2 to
shrink and remove unneeded resources.

salu2
-- 
thorsten

"Together we stand, divided we fall!" 
Hey you (Pink Floyd)