Re: Vardirlayout scenario

[email protected] wrote:

> 
> My own preference is to move everything I can out of the web root

Mine too.

 on the
> one hand, but on the other I don't like the idea of having site specific
> stuff in 2 places, one under the web root and one not. So my bent would
> be to move the remaining common stuff out, at least as a first step.

> 
> From my pov that would mean locales and other "data" for one, which
> might lead to a "data" directory somewhere. 

By locales in the proposal i put up, I meant 'locales' and not
translations, just to be clear (the diagram in the link
http://xarigami.com/devnote/cirrus_directory_restructure_2 shows how
this would work).

As to data that could be at the level of a set of sites (eg take some
custom category images, or corporate files used across a set of
multisites), or at the level of an individual site so we need to cater
for both.

The idea of  the 'sites' directory is useful here for data and configs
as both are site specific as well. Note that i had a copy paste error in
the link i posted of our scenario, and it has now been corrected to
'sites' directory.  It was the  'configs' directory in the original
dirlayout doc and not to be confused with the html web root dirs.

The 'default' 'site' directory contains data, including any theme
specific data shared across all sites. ('sites/default' as in the link i
posted previously)
Then there are the specific site directories for site specific data and
config.
There could be all sorts of 'default' or site specific content that goes
in these 'site' directories not just theme /templates.

So this gets around having a separate 'data' directory again for each
site in addition to the configs dir as per the original layout.


> On the other hand, I don't think I would move the themes directory out
> from html. There is nothing so site specific as a theme in my view.
> 

Well, I guess that is what we are trying to change a little as i really
find it a burden having the themes so tied to content and is a real time
consumer in terms of development. In fact I think it is a key area
holding xaraya back (but that's for another thread ...) Thus in this
scenario I moved the 'themes' directory out of the web root. I've been
looking at ways to have cleaner, more portable themes, and 'skins' that
can add colour or images to easily upgrade themes. In this case the
themes are less tied to the site than we have now. The specific 'site'
directories would have the custom templates for a given theme/site. It's
another area we are working on at the moment so it may be that the
themes directory does stay in the web root.


> As to the code remaining in html: just as index.php is conceptually the
> "front controller" for Xaraya, bootstrap.php is the "backend
> controller", and to the degree that the backend is configurable, it
> seems to me that something like it (the sys class is the minimum) needs
> to be there. For the record the file is less than 15K, so it wouldn't be
> taking uo a lot of space.


Well it does make it easier having it there.  My concern also is the
additional hits we get from various directory setups  and the ensuing
code required, so I'd very much like to have som input and any
information they can shed on that. The other area of course as you
mentioned is the modules/theme distribution/packaging. We've tried to
adjust the original dir structure to better cater for that or at least
help in simplifying it some.

Been busy but I see the scenario now in mtn, so I'll pull it down and
take it for a ride and then I should have a better idea for discussion.

Thanks
Jo


> 
> Marc
> 


-- 
http://xarigami.com :: Creative web development with Xaraya
http://2skies.com   :: Open source hosting and development