[development] Modules page rework

Frando (Franz Heinzmann) frando at xcite-online.de
Sat Jul 29 16:20:18 UTC 2006

Morbus Iff schrieb:
>> 1) I'm using a module metadata file. It's a .ini file, because that's 
>> easy. All the discussions I've read/been involved with in the past 
>> showed the .ini file as being the least offensive of the various 
> I'd still like to voice my dislike of this approach:
>  * We've moved away from .sql to PHP .install files.
>  * Inis are easy to parse for PHP, but PHP is even easier!
>  * It presumes a "new" format that a developer has to know.
>  * Your comments about translations are valid.
> Likewise, I don't like the idea of having multiple meta-files hanging 
> around. There's been lots of talk about not having to load in help files 
> for every module load, and that means sticking them in an external file. 
>  I'd hate to have an .ini, a .help, an .install, and a .module. There 
> should be a .module (the code), an .install (get the code running) and a 
> .meta (or whatever, to describe the code).
I don't see the difference.
I think it can ease a lot of pain to strip out things in different 
files. Especially if you're not yet too familiar with the piece of code 
you want to deal with. You find the pieces of code faster, and if you 
just want to edit the description of a module, or the help texts, you 
don't have to deal with the "real" code.
So I'm for the meta files, and I don't mind wether they are ini or php, 
I think both is fine, as long as it's seperate file.

More information about the development mailing list