[development] Install profiles should be in their own directories
adrian at bryght.com
Wed Aug 9 15:04:37 UTC 2006
On 8/9/06, Khalid B <kb at 2bits.com> wrote:
> On 8/9/06, Gary Feldman <dpal_gaf_devel at marsdome.com> wrote:
> > Khalid B wrote:
> > > Install profile is confusing .
> > Part of the confusion is that, grammatically, it should be "Installation
> > profile." (Nouns can be adjectives, and nouns can be verbed, but verbs
> > can't be adjectives.)
> > Installation profile works for me, but I prefer package configuration or
> > package description. If the file will be *.profile, then package
> > profile seems good.
> The main source of confusion, to me, is that it is a term with historical
> baggage, and its ambiguity means different things to different people.
> Profile can be confused with Drupal's profile module as well.
> Package seems to convey the right idea, and has no historical
> use in Drupal.
package == something that can be installed.
apt == advanced package tool (or similar)
A theme is a package, and a module is a package and an engine is a package
and an install profile/distribution is a package.
The dependency system (with the .meta files) being developed handles
dependencies between all these packages (of different types)
I vote for distribution, it is very well suited for our meaning.. and the
main reason we want 'install profiles' is because we want to build
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the development