[development] Install profiles should be in their own directories

[Adrian Rossouw]

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
distributions.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20060809/4a35dfb0/attachment.htm