Posted by wik on May 31, 2010 at 2:51pm
Hello,
I am looking to create meta package/module using http://drupal.org/project/features it's will contain mostly dependencies and basic settings I'll add to *.install due to some limitations of strongarm, etc.
So, the only component my feature have is some dependencies and therefor my *.info file does not contain any "feautres[][]=" generated which cause it to treat as regular module(not displaying under features list).
Well, from one side that's seems correct, no features = module, but this is mostly because of limitation and I still would like to treat it as feature.
I tried this
features[][] = ""Works fine, but not sure if it's correct, i.e. any known side affect?
Thanks.
Comments
Put in a Sitewide Context
This is precisely the strategy I've arrived at to build sites with Features. I found that I could include many of those parts of a site that would otherwise need to remain in the DB, and not in a feature.
I create a "sitewide" or "misc" context with Context module (with it's Strongarm variables, etc), include that in the feature, and then it shows up in the Features list.
Have you found that your "Meta" feature is working for getting all those extra dependencies and Strongarm settings in to version control? Are you having to tweak in the GUI on live? What does your *.info look like?
oh, thanks for the tip about
oh, thanks for the tip about context, I really lost it from the mind :)
I am not going to tweak in the GUI so far and my *.info file pretty simple:
core = "6.x"dependencies[] = "features"
dependencies[] = "htmlpurifier"
dependencies[] = "imce"
dependencies[] = "imce_wysiwyg"
dependencies[] = "wysiwyg"
...
the rest logic went to *.install and it's mostly updating input formats, adding profiles for imce and wysiwyg, linking to role, etc.
Whole site as a single Feature?
In thinking about how Features can gather elements from a Context, I realized that for simple sites, one could grab all views, Strongarm variables, Pathauto paths, Contexts, and essentially have the whole site in one Feature.
For a single developer, this might be a quick way to get most of the configuration into code.
Any potential downsides?
"For a single developer, this
"For a single developer, this might be a quick way to get most of the configuration into code."
It can be the best way to put ALL configuration in code. Because it can be tricky to separate all a site in different features AND that those features covers ALL exportables of the site.
Build nice features doesn-t mean that you grab all your configuration to put it in code; so only one features can solves this issue : you are sure not to forget one views or cck fields or context that are not directly related to a feature.