[development] 4.8/5.0: Modules, the install system,
kb at 2bits.com
Wed Feb 22 16:06:07 UTC 2006
On 2/22/06, Morbus Iff <morbus at disobey.com> wrote:
> > I fully support the notion that every module has its own directory.
> >> * By putting modules into their own directory, we're making it easier
> >> for some of those comments.help related ideas to kick in - to stick
> >> the help text in an external file and call it only when needed. I
> >> also think that chx's splitmode is a lot nicer if we could constrain
> >> the split functions to their source directory instead of having a
> >> primary directory full of 1000+ mini-files.
> > We discussed it on the mailing list before, and an .ini file will have
> > the module name and description. This avoids the need to load all
> > module when the admin goes to admin/modules, and overcomes
> > the memory issue associated with that.
> Why an .ini file? The .ini extension *means* something (Windows .ini
> file) - is Drupal going to have full support of the .ini specification?
> If not, I'd rather use .help, and stick the module name, description,
> and all help docs in there too. If .help isn't generic enough (for the
> various metadata things you mention), then use .info. But .ini *means*
> something and it means we either support the .ini spec fully (ugh,
> really?) or overload the meaning (never a good thing).
Not for the love of Windows (I have very little of that), but for the ease
of parsing, ubiquitous format, extensibility ...etc..
See the order discussion on this late Jan here
Allie makes convincing arguments.
I am not hung up on the .ini part, it can be .info or .config for all I care.
What I do not want is a proliferation of a slew of files (we now have .module,
.install, then .help, .somethingelse, .other, ...etc.)
The same .ini/.config file can hold help, version, ...etc. with ease.
the key here.
More information about the development