-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2k
File naming conventions: Users (Admin) module versus Article module #817
Comments
@vaucouleur right. |
I personally like the structure of the article page names. |
Same here. I prefer the articles view naming convention. |
Ok, thanks for the feedback. There is also a simple, yet important, argument in favor of the Article module naming convention: there is much more generated "Article" (or "Article-like") modules out-there, than the relatively recent "user admin" pages. The changes should have relatively less impact in terms of merging. @rhutchison Is renaming the files using the Article module convention OK with you ? |
I like user.list.client.html or article.list.client.html. Or list.article.client.html. I like sticking with dots as that is how most other things are named. I can include the article pieces in my refactor once its concluded: |
I thought this whole question was about whether the convention is to use 'user' as a first word in the files or the actual action 'list', so basically it's 'user.list' vs 'list.user' Whether we use dots or dashes doesn't really matter to me, but I tend towards dots as I see it also used in other frameworks. So I think we're quite in agreement here? |
I personally like list.user.client.html. Person is going to know they are in the users module so its important to put the action first. IMO |
👍 I agree that the action should be first in the naming convention... and I prefer dots as well. |
I messed up the initial PR while trying to do some git surgery (conflict resolution). Sorry about that. I will re-submit a new one. |
Sure |
I hope I did not miss anything. I only renamed one controller, 3 html view pages, and edited one route file. The other files already followed the verb-object.client convention. |
There are two minor (harmless) inconsistencies in the naming of the view files :
Users (admin) pages:
versus Article pages:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: