TYPO3 Core

Would really like to see this feature, too. Makes setting up new projects (with similar fileadmin structures) much faster.

+1
would also like this very much! d.ross or Paul, are you able to create a patch?

Hi there,
it could be very handy suche feature.
Looks like, what need to patch function checkIncludeLines in t3lib/class.t3lib_tsparser.php.

The code is some old, so it's not so easy to understand the logic. Normally, need to add regexp, which will preparse and substitue the TS constants.

If anybody could indicate the documentation about TS parsing (checking constants etc), probably, could take care about this feature.

Regards,
Fedir

Untested but afaik it doesn´t work in 6.1 either

The issue request has been about the include statements inside of a setup. This could be realized for the setup only. Includes for constants could be disallowed for this enhanced feature.

Franz is correct. Inside setup would be sufficient as you can deliver the fixed constants file by extension, while TS path needs to be flexible.

Cheers

David

Can someone give a use case which cannot be solved by the include directory directive?

If there won't be any response in 3 months, the issue will be closed.

I personally doubt the extra value of this feature. Now that it's possible to include entire directories (recursively, only certain file extensions), it's easier to change the includes without touching the actual <include command itself.

The usecase remains the same.

If you have a multidomaintree where you want to divide the branches from each other you would go with an automatic include path for ts like this -> "fileadmin/usecase/{$BRANCHNAME}/scripts/ts"

So in the end this option is still handy if it would be there.

It will most likely take extra processing time, this has to be taken into account.

But AFAIK only once until it is cached?

Can someone give a use case which cannot be solved by the include directory directive?

Other way round asked: How would you divide a multidomaintree with branches in fileadmin with the automatic include option -without touching the path?

Is there a particular reason you do not store your templating information in an extension?

Quite simple: There must not be an extension.
A lot of people setup systems without any provider extensions for ts only.

Cheers

Even if you use an extension for providing the whole site package it would still make sense to have such a feature. The constant could carry the extension name/ name of the site package and all the additional includes don't need any manipulation/ further changes and could be re-used.

The directory inclusion is IMHO not enough since you cannot tell the system the sort/ load order of the files, can you?

phew... I gotta be honest here.
I never needed this in 15 years and yes, I have done tons of multi-tree sites.
Effectively doubling the rendering times of TS in the frontend just for this?
I have a hard time telling myself that punishing all users with a massive performance implication doesn't quite convince me yet.

I'm totally up for discussion, don't get me wrong but right now the pros don't outweigh the cons.

I still like the idea from an integrator's point of view. But making the whole process significantly slower is not worth the effort. I don't get the use case for multi domain setups.

The usecase is that if you setup multiple sites in one tree with completely differing setups you cannot have a preconfigured tree which can be setup by drag and drop plus adding a single constant to assign the paths for all relating files. You have to manipulate every regarding field manually. The related fields are userTS, TSsetup, and so on.

But in the end if this really twices the rendering the onthought solution isn't the best. Perhaps there's another possiblity to provide relative setting paths.

d.ros no-lastname-given wrote:

multiple sites in one tree

Is this a typo?
Otherwise I need a lot more info on what you try to achieve :)