Forum OpenACS Development: Lists and theme zen

Collapse
Posted by Malte Sussdorff on
Out of curiosity: Why is the compact class definition in theme-zen.css and not in lists.css? The acs-templating list generation code uses the "compact" class for the pagination, though in a new non theme-zen installation it cannot find it. Did I miss something?
Collapse
2: Re: Lists and theme zen (response to 1)
Posted by Emmanuelle Raffenne on
Malte,

compact class is defined in theme-zen.css but also in site-master.css. This class is used for breadcrumbs also, in theme-zen/lib/lrn-master and in www/default-master so I guess this is why.

Collapse
3: Re: Lists and theme zen (response to 2)
Posted by Malte Sussdorff on
Hmm... okay, slightly confusing. I just hope that someone is going to write an upgrade manual with all the changes that have happened...
Collapse
Posted by Torben Brosten on
"A major number change indicates a fundamental change in the architecture of the system, e.g. OpenACS 3 to ACS 4. A major change is required if .. upgrade is non-trivial, or if the platform changes substantially."

from https://openacs.org/doc/current/eng-standards-versioning.html

Should 5.3 be re-released as 6.0?

Collapse
Posted by Malte Sussdorff on
Torben, that would have to be 5.3.1, as 5.3 itself does not have the issues. But good point.
Collapse
Posted by Don Baccus on
We (me, mostly, I guess) didn't realize the magnitude of the change to core (as opposed to .lrn) that this would entail.

Branching would've greatly complicated things, delaying them, adding a merge step most likely (5.3 -> 5.4 [say] -> HEAD), etc etc.

So the OCT decided we'd stick with the 5.3.1 designation for core. We weren't that happy about it, because we saw that if we'd been smarter we could've predict that the scope of the change for core was going to be larger than we first thought.

We did, of course, move .LRN from 2.2 to 2.3 because of the size of the change. It was obvious moving to the zen theme there was going to be huge.

Keep in mind that we were all learning about accessibility standards as we did the work. I think the team did an incredible job (not me, the team, I did very little of the work other than dotlrn-specific stuff like new-portal).

The change isn't significant enough to warrant a 5->6 or 2->3 change IMO. We're just changing some CSS and HTML. It's not like we're adding ajax or xotcl to the core ... There is no "fundamental change in the architecture of the system". The changes are noticable because they're in HTML and CSS so the user sees them. The user would see a trivial change like deciding all text should be surrounded by H tags, too, but that wouldn't be a "fundamental change in the architecture of the system", right ???

The next core release will be 5.4, because we'll be completing Lee Denison's revamping of the API for placing stuff in the HEAD section, etc. That's much more major than our relatively small CSS/HTML changes for lists etc.