[development] Files table includes file_directory_path

Khalid Baheyeldin kb at 2bits.com
Fri Jul 17 16:37:52 UTC 2009

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Adrian Rossouw <adrian at daemon.co.za>wrote:

> On 16 Jul 2009, at 4:16 PM, Khalid Baheyeldin wrote:
>  As others said, you either use symlinks (which forces you to have two
>> directories per site), or the new sites.php feature of Drupal 7.
>> Using that, you can have a contrived name for each site (even site1,
>> site2, or an md5 hash for each site), and redirect the site in it.
>> The trick is to not use sites/default for each site from now on, and only
>> use a unique identifier. That identifier can be the same when you develop
>> the site, and remains the same when you deploy the site.
> Just because a work around exists doesn't mean the current behaviour isn't
> wrong.
> What are the reasons for the files not being relative ?

Relative or absolute can be debated. I think that relative is more elegant
and more portable.

But this is for stuff in the files table only. Once you publish a site and
you reference static things in it as <img src="/sites/
site1.example.com/files/blah.jpg" /> you are stuck with that path.

The sites.php method avoids this. You can have sites/12345/files/blah.jpg,
and it is no longer dependent on the domain name. Development and testing
can happen to the same path.

So, yes, I agree that relative is better, but it does not solve all the
issues that sites.php does.
Khalid M. Baheyeldin
2bits.com, Inc.
Drupal optimization, development, customization and consulting.
Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability. --  Edsger W.Dijkstra
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. --   Leonardo da Vinci
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20090717/7d1755e5/attachment.htm>

More information about the development mailing list