Re: Getting both better internal and external APIs intoDrupal 7

On 12/31/2007 7:50:22 PM, Khalid Baheyeldin (kb2bits.com) wrote:
> I tried my best to have install profiles named
something else (packages,
> distros), but the counter
> argument is that it was too late to do it.
>
> This will cause a lot of confusion in the future,
unless we give profile.
> module the bullet of mercy in D6 and replace it with
bio (or friends) for
> example.

It will still be confusing. I think anyone who's familiar
with social 
networking sites will tend to associate "profile"
with people, even though 
it does have other meanings.

Michelle

Michelle Cox wrote:
>
> It will still be confusing. I think anyone who's
familiar with social
> networking sites will tend to associate
"profile" with people, even
> though it does have other meanings.
>
> Michelle
>

Well I missed the initial discussion with this, but agree
profile is
likely to be confusing. However, I'm not convinced it's too
late to
change how it's presented.

When drupal.org is able to provide complete packages to
download -
they'll include drupal core + the .profile + modules - so at
that point
it's not just an install profile any more - the .profile
itself is
simply one component of a bigger package. So why not make
that section
of downloads "distributions" (or whatever)? Then
profile continues to be
what defines the content of a distribution and how it's set
up.

On  01.Jan.2008, at 03:28 PM, catch wrote:

>  So why not make that section
> of downloads "distributions" (or whatever)?
Then profile continues  
> to be
> what defines the content of a distribution and how it's
set up.

+1 KABILLION!

/ liza

On Jan 1, 2008, at 12:28 PM, catch wrote:

> Well I missed the initial discussion with this, but
agree profile  
> is likely to be confusing. However, I'm not convinced
it's too late  
> to change how it's presented.

I, too, was sounding the alarm on this one months ago... :(

The main problem is that the core installer looks for a
"profiles"  
directory in your drupal directory tree.  This has been true
since  
D5, and isn't going to change now in D6, either.

True, once everything is packaged automagically by d.o into
full  
blown "distributions" (or whatever we call them),
we can partly hide  
this fact from end users.  The tarball you download that
includes  
core, the contribs you need, and the install profile, can
all be  
called a "distribution", and it can quietly put
the .profile file in  
the right subdirectory of your "profiles"
directory.

However, I think Drupal is notorious for changing its mind
about  
terminology, and leaving things in an inconsistent,
confusing state  
("categories" vs. "taxonomy" rehashed,
anyone?).  Sure, we can  
*attempt* to hide some of the ugly details in the name of
"our users  
don't need to know", but that often results in more
confusion, not  
less. :(

So long as the installer is looking in your
"profiles" directory, for  
files that end in ".profile", I think the
"installation profile"  
terminology is going to have to stay, as much as that
sucks.

-Derek (dww)

Quoting Derek Wright <drupaldwwright.net>:

>
> So long as the installer is looking in your
"profiles" directory, for 
>  files that end in ".profile", I think the
"installation profile"  
> terminology is going to have to stay, as much as that
sucks.
>

I don't think the terminology sucks as much as it should
have had more 
discussion prior to implementation.  If we rename it, we
should look at 
.profile files becoming .mil files as in Module
Implementation 
Language.  This represents well what the .profile file gives
us and 
can't be confused with anything else.

Earnie -- http://for-my-kids.com/
-- http://give-me-an-offer.
com/