Re: Updates in the plugin development documentation

>> Commit 13252[1] introduced the following paragraphs:
>>
>> "A plugin can try to be smart about where to find the needed
>> configuration file by doing something such as this:
>>
>> if (!@include_once(SM_PATH . 'config/config_demo.php')) if
>> (!@include_once(SM_PATH . 'plugins/demo/config.php'))
>> @include_once(SM_PATH . 'plugins/demo/config.sample.php');
>>
>> This assumes that the plugin has some sensible defaults in the sample
>> configuration file - if the plugin must be configured specifically for
>> the system upon which it is installed, remove the third line in this
>> example."
>>
>> If a plugin has a general configuration that can make it work out of
>> the box in the most cases, I prefer to have that configuration coded
>> into the plugin itself.
>
> OK, then you should do that in your plugins.  ;-)  I think this has to
> be the choice of the author.  For some plugins, it's just not sensible
> from a design or coding point of view to hard-code defaults. It makes
> more sense to me to use a default configuration file, which could be
> called config_default.php.
>
>> If a valid configuration file exists, the plugin will allow
>> this to overrule the pre-set configuration.
>
> Cascading configuration sets vs. just one should be the author's choice
> IMO.
>
>> I don't like to have the plugin read configuration from a configuration
>>  file with the word "sample" in the filename, even if such a file
>> exists. One reason is that it encourages administrators to modify
>> "config.sample.php" instead of "config.php" which might cause them
>> trouble later.
>
> On one hand, they deserve it if they can't read the installation
> instructions.  On the other hand, I understand the desire to make it easy
> to use for clueless admins too.  Personally, at this juncture, I am not
> interested in going quite that far.  What I can do, however, is use a
> config_default.php instead of config_sample.php.  I will still include an
> example configuration file, though, named as you suggest below.
>
>> Another is that some distributions might want to have
>> "config.sample.php" in a documentation directory (and not a code
>> directory) when re-distributing.
>>
>> For these reasons I'd like to have the code and the describing text in
>> the documentation rewritten so that it doesn't suggest actual use of the
>> file "config.sample.php".
>>
>> And correct me if I'm wrong, but "sample" should really be "example",
>> since that's what's it all about. A "sample" is a small part of anything
>>  or one of a number, intended to show the quality, style, or nature of
>> the whole. An "example" is a pattern or model, as of something to be
>> imitated or avoided. Could the documentation be updated with "sample"
>> replaced by "example", or is the old naming convention too much rooted?

I read through the changes in commit 13263[1]. Fair enough. Thanks.

Sincerely,
Fredrik

[1]
http://squirrelmail.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/squirrelmail/trunk/documentation/devel/devel.sgml?r1=13263&r2=13262&pathrev=13263

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
-----
squirrelmail-devel mailing list
Posting guidelines: http://squirrelmail.org/postingguidelines
List address: [email protected]
List archives: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.mail.squirrelmail.devel
List info (subscribe/unsubscribe/change options): https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/squirrelmail-devel