[dojo-contributors] Splitting projects between dojo and dojox

Eugene Lazutkin eugene at lazutkin.com
Fri Jun 1 14:49:40 EDT 2007


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

peter e higgins 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 CODE 
> 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.style and 
> dojo.getStyle and setStyle all now exist ... bad example, but you get the 
> point, no?

Actually that is what I wanted to do --- to update existing dojo.*
objects by loading a dojox.* module. I am not sure if it is legit. It
may be confusing, if somebody wants to debug it. Of course it can be
solved by documented all effects on other objects.

Thanks,

Eugene

> 
> 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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGYGpEY214tZwSfCsRApOkAKCg4957vI7wJ1DhSonOhDtZWVv2jQCghiEP
JOiy920v5BosYuM6NmsAS9U=
=BM3J
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the dojo-contributors mailing list