[RFC|Merged] Merge style components

[Oleg]

What is the purpose of bbcode bit field?

I'm not sure about that. It is used by bbcode.php for something

Removal of bbcode bit field should be a separate RFC + PR and it should be approved by someone who does know and understand its purpose.

Merging of style components sounds good to me but it needs to be extricated out of 577 into its own PR for me to look at it.

Some of viewtopic.php?f=108&t=42439 will I'm assuming need to be included into the PR merging style components. Anything in viewtopic.php?f=108&t=42439 not dealing with merging of style components should be a separate PR.

[Arty]

I agree with bbcode bit field, I'll keep it for now, but it will be moved to styles table because template table won't exist any more.

I'll try to keep pull request to bare minimum, it will include only functions needed to make things work: merging components, styles tree, basic functionality in acp_styles (install/uninstall, active/deactivate, style details).

Things that won't make it into pull request:
- bbcode bit field
- editing templates via acp
- locator functions
- cleaning up acp_styles language file (removing unused entries - I'll remove few entries that refer to components that no longer exist, but not all of them)

[Arty]

Old pull request closed, new development is in this branch: https://github.com/cyberalien/phpbb3/co ... components

It isn't finished yet, but current tree should be working. All current commits, except for new acp_styles.php, will be the same in pull request, so those commits can be validated. Don't mind old text in docblocks, I haven't started working on that yet.

[Arty]

Patch is available: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/625

Code included in patch:
- Merging style components.
- Unlimited styles tree.
- New style superclass. Now there are 2 global variables: $style and $template instead of only $template.
- New acp_styles. It includes only basic styles management functions to make patch smaller. Other functions, such as template editing in acp, will have its own RFCs.

[igorw]

Merged.

[Michaelo]

+1
Enough said...

[imkingdavid]

This was already merged and does not require further input.

[Michaelo]

Actually I had added a comment relating to naderman post re inheritance, but realising the RFC had already been merged, and as I could not delete my post, I simply added +1