[dojo-contributors] Splitting projects between dojo and dojox

Tom Trenka ttrenka at gmail.com
Fri Jun 1 12:40:10 EDT 2007

We considered this and I think the end decision is that we aren't going to
allow that at all.  But I'm open to a very convincing argument to the
Of course, whether or not other project leads are open is a completely
different story :)


On 6/1/07, peter e higgins <dante at inpdx.net> wrote:
> On Friday 01 June 2007 10:30, Jon Sykes wrote:
> > Pro's and con's time.
> I like the idea of keeping the namespace clean and consistant, but the
> idea
> that one could "dojo.require("dojox.additions.something"); that would make
> something in the core dojo library more robust is a good one.  put the
> in dojox, but when you require it, it over-rides or appens things in dojo
> core ... eg: dojo.style dojo.require('dojox.style.addons') and dojo.styleand
> dojo.getStyle and setStyle all now exist ... bad example, but you get the
> point, no?
> still keeps the core code small, and if you _want_ these extra features
> and
> whatnot, you don't have to differentiate between dojo.style and
> dojox.style,
> dojo.style just got enchanced instead ...
> my 0.02$US ...
> Regards,
> Peter Higgins
> _______________________________________________
> dojo-contributors mailing list
> dojo-contributors at dojotoolkit.org
> http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20070601/899b5c45/attachment.htm 

More information about the dojo-contributors mailing list