I'm considering making a change to the location of the Blueprint CSS folder in the 2.x line of the Blueprint theme. Currently the blueprint files are located inside a subfolder of blueprint, which makes for a nice little row of Blueprint folders with lots of room for confusion in the documentation:
themes/blueprint/blueprint/blueprint/blueprint/*.css!
I would like some feedback on two potential changes:
- Renaming the Blueprint CSS folder to framework making the path:
themes/blueprint/blueprint/framework/blueprint/*.css! - The download of BlueprintCSS is a large download with a bunch of Ruby scripts, Photoshop files and even a couple .jar files.
What if we were to require only copying the files in the subfolder of ./blueprint (the basic css files) into the framework folder? How would that effect the way you use Blueprint? Would that cause a problem for the way that drush_make downloads Blueprint?
Please provide your feedback.
Comments
Comment #1
shrop commentedI think the path would actually be: themes/blueprint/framework/blueprint/*.css. Comparing to my install, you have one more "blueprint" in the path.
I like the idea of only copying in the css files, but I think this needs to be optional. If Drush_Make is used, git would pull down the entire blueprint release.
I would like to see a way to accomplish either method. Can the blueprint theme look at two locations for the css files? If so, you could reserve themes/blueprint/framework/blueprint/*.css for the full blueprint package and themes/blueprint/framework/*.css for developers who just want to copy in the css files.
Maybe that is too complicated, but I agree with the change to make the path less confusing overall.
Thanks!
Shrop
Comment #2
designerbrent commentedThanks for your input, Shrop:
I actually think I got it correctly the first time. In the 1.x branch, it is less but in the 2.x branch there is a sub-folder that has the theme in it:
I don't know if looking in two locations is the best way to do it either. I think that would be too much overhead. So I for now, I'll ditch that idea.
As for changing the name to "framework" how would that change things with the drush_make file? I haven't tried that yet but I assume you can rename the folder to anything in the make file?
-Brent
Comment #3
shrop commentedSounds fair Brent. I was looking at the 1.x branch when commenting on depth. Makes sense now :)
As far as drush_make, you would just change the destination folder name to include framework. Not a big deal IMHO. Drush_make is really only for the initial Drupal build. After that, it isn't used unless I am missing something.
Below is the code used for drush_make to pull in Blueprint.
; Libraries
libraries[blueprint][download][type] = "git"
libraries[blueprint][download][url] = "git://github.com/joshuaclayton/blueprint-css.git"
libraries[blueprint][directory_name] = blueprint
libraries[blueprint][destination] = themes/blueprint
The directory_name could be changed to "framework" if that is the new requirement. As long as noted well in the readme/install files, we should be ok.
Thanks!
Shrop
Comment #4
designerbrent commentedJust committed this so now blueprint is looking in to framework folder and not yet another blueprint folder.
http://drupal.org/cvs?commit=323378
Comment #5
fm commentedbrent says above:
But from the README.txt:
These filepaths appear to conflict. The README seems to omit the extra level of directories.
Comment #6
designerbrent commentedThanks for point that out, fm. I've updated the documentation now.
Comment #8
designerbrent commentedI know this issue is closed but I wanted to cross reference this to the most recent changes relating to the location of the Blueprint Framework files: Blueprint framework files are now located outside of the blueprint theme folder.