[geeklog-devel] User requests (was: Story Templates)

Oliver Spiesshofer oliver at spiesshofer.com
Sat Aug 11 23:15:45 EDT 2007

Joe Mucchiello wrote:
> My point was that the only reason you don't propose doing this as a 
> plugin is you have CVS access. 
You assumption is false. I do not think that this is sensible to be done 
in a plugin. that is why i think it should be core code. i do not think 
it is good to have to go to a plugin-admin page to start a story, a 
static page, a calendar event with pre-filled text for a special occasion.
> You are looking to provide templates that will cause stories entered 
> at different times by different authors to share a similar look and 
> feel. Some story types may have different looks but all stories of the 
> same type should be uniform. This isn't rocket science. I'm just 
> saying you can accomplish this with the existing template library and 
> a few well placed calls. I'm also saying that other than stories and 
> staticpages, there's not much other need for this templating system. 
> And I'm saying that you can do this through the plugin API without 
> modifying core. Have I missed something? 
Yes. You teach me how to do something in a plugin and assume at the same 
time that I know how to do that, and that I think it would be better 
thing to do it as a plugin - and that I still propose it as core code 
just because i have CVS access. Sorry, but that sounds like you assume i 
am a guy who does thing in the wrong way despite knowing better, but you 
still seem to feel the necessity to teach me how to do it better... that 
does not make sense and tells me that you do not think much of the way I 
work and/or my work. Maybe you should go through the list of my 
contributions to the core code in the history file before you start 
accusing me of such things.
> I've seen the forum posts requesting such a feature and I believe it 
> use to be in the bug tracker/feature requests. (Another planning tool 
> missing.) Still, doing it as a plugin means sites that don't use it 
> aren't burdened by the additional runtime if'ing around the code.
same as above. why do you tell me why it should b a plugin and say at 
the same time that I know that already and that I ignore it?
And I still think that this should be done in the core code.
> There's no reason why a non-commercial group cannot plan ahead. Most 
> OSS projects have Roadmaps. Most OSS are not commercial operations. 
> Roadmaps are about planning. This goes back to the end of life for 
> PHP4 and my comment when that was announced that GL should have an 
> announcement that GL 1.5 will be PHP5 only. Or 1.4.2, or 1.4.3? 
> Something. There should be a plan.
I do no say we cannot. And you should not blankly assume that we do not 
have any plans. We simply do not hace many planned thing and did not 
publish a refined list. We definitely know some things that will be in 
the code by a certain point in time, we simply did not write it up so 
far as a public list. The summer of code program lists points that are 
on the "roadmap" for example. I just say that until now we had better 
things to do. I do not say that is the best way to do it. I say that is 
what we did so far. And again, you can agree with that or criticize 
that. But do not expect that your ciritcism will be heard by people you 
accuse of the behavior mentioned above. You will have to sell you 
request so that people like it.

Btw: this template issue is becoming a pure theoretical discussion. I 
talked to another core developer and we came to the point that the 
feature is not worth doing sincet the application is too specific and it 
will be able to be become reality as soon as the webservices are life. 
by discussion btw, not accusations.


More information about the geeklog-devel mailing list