I agree on the naming (it was a conflict in my mind when I was doing it). the data_dir is literally ripped out from the original. any idea where it puts things without any data_dir definition? On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Pedro Melo <melo@simplicidade.org> wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Slavik Goltser <slavikg@gmail.com> wrote:
there is already a Dancer::Template::Mason, this plugin is intended to be a Dancer2 module.
Sure, I know, but I'm saying that the name should be Dancer2::Template::Mason not Dancer2::Template::Mason2, because the template system is called Mason, not Mason2.
data_dir ... I followed the original module closely, will take a look to see what happens when it isn't there.
I think in the situation less is more. The less you add as semantics to your layer, the less documentation one needs to know how D2::T::Mason will work, because you can say "just look at Mason defaults".
Besides, there is no good data_dir default to use. Your suggestion about using comp_root/data is not good because with shared perl installs you might not even have permissions to write there. The default data_dir doesn't have that problem.
thank you for taking a look.
No problem. I'm still using a git submodule to have my own Dancer2::Template::Mason module, so having this on CPAN will make my life easier.
Bye, -- Pedro Melo @pedromelo http://www.simplicidade.org/ xmpp:melo@simplicidade.org mailto:melo@simplicidade.org
_______________________________________________ dancer-users mailing list dancer-users@dancer.pm http://lists.preshweb.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/dancer-users