Body: <p>First of all, I'm loving Craft. So refreshing (even coming from EE). Kudos to the team.</p>
  
  <p>I'm curious if anyone has had similar views on Craft's handling of Entry Types. It would seem favorable to allow sharing of them across Sections or, better yet, break them out altogether as a separate entity so that in Settings > Content you'd have the option for Fields, Sections, Entry Types and so on.</p>
  
  <p>For example, to create a 'Common' Entry Type usable across multiple Channels I currently have to rebuild it for each channel. If Entry Types were broken out, I could simply choose from those available.</p>
  
  <p>On the other hand, I admittedly may not be approaching Entry Type usage in the best manner possible. Does anyone have any thoughts?</p>
  
  <p>Cheers.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-10-14T15:43:42.377Z
Comments.Text: +1 for this. I really like your idea of having a separate section within Craft where you can manage your entry types. I am often finding myself creating the same entry types over and over again for different sections, so something like this would be most welcome.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Jamie Wade
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-10-15T07:31:28.247Z
Comments.Text: Just curious, do you guys have an example of content that is structured in such a way that you need this? I've always seen the separation of sections, entry types, and fields as hierarchical buildingblocks, and don't really see how sharing entry types would be relevant. Is it just for grouping fields?
Comments.UserDisplayName: André Elvan
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-10-15T12:50:33.247Z
Comments.Text: Hi André. I, too, see Sections, Entry Types and Fields as hierarchical building blocks, but in the current structure Entry Types are locked in to their parent Section whereas, for example, Fields are reusable across Sections. To me, allowing Entry Types to do the same is more in line with the Craft ethos. Let's say I have a 'Common' Entry Type that has what I define as a default set of fields that I'd like to make available across multiple Sections of the site. To do so, I have to recreate the Entry Type for each Section which seems to me the long way around. All told, Craft remains brilliant.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Chris
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-10-15T21:01:51.613Z
Comments.Text: Interesting idea. Question though — if you are reusing entry types in different channels, perhaps those channels should be combined and you should look at using other techniques to define your 'sections' and or 'navigation', like categories, tags, or structures (with related entries). Just a thought.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Douglas McDonald
Tags: <entries>
Title: Sharing Entry Types Across Sections (or Breaking Them Out Altogether)
ThreadText: # Sharing Entry Types Across Sections (or Breaking Them Out Altogether)
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2014-10-14)
  
  First of all, I'm loving Craft. So refreshing (even coming from EE). Kudos to the team.
  
  I'm curious if anyone has had similar views on Craft's handling of Entry Types. It would seem favorable to allow sharing of them across Sections or, better yet, break them out altogether as a separate entity so that in Settings > Content you'd have the option for Fields, Sections, Entry Types and so on.
  
  For example, to create a 'Common' Entry Type usable across multiple Channels I currently have to rebuild it for each channel. If Entry Types were broken out, I could simply choose from those available.
  
  On the other hand, I admittedly may not be approaching Entry Type usage in the best manner possible. Does anyone have any thoughts?
  
  Cheers.
  
  **Tags:** entries
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: +1 for this. I really like your idea of having a separate section within Craft where you can manage your entry types. I am often finding myself creating the same entry types over and over again for different sections, so something like this would be most welcome.  
  > **username_2**: Just curious, do you guys have an example of content that is structured in such a way that you need this? I've always seen the separation of sections, entry types, and fields as hierarchical buildingblocks, and don't really see how sharing entry types would be relevant. Is it just for grouping fields?  
  > **username_0**: Hi username_2. I, too, see Sections, Entry Types and Fields as hierarchical building blocks, but in the current structure Entry Types are locked in to their parent Section whereas, for example, Fields are reusable across Sections. To me, allowing Entry Types to do the same is more in line with the Craft ethos. Let's say I have a 'Common' Entry Type that has what I define as a default set of fields that I'd like to make available across multiple Sections of the site. To do so, I have to recreate the Entry Type for each Section which seems to me the long way around. All told, Craft remains brilliant.  
  > **username_3**: Interesting idea. Question though — if you are reusing entry types in different channels, perhaps those channels should be combined and you should look at using other techniques to define your 'sections' and or 'navigation', like categories, tags, or structures (with related entries). Just a thought.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 0 answers
  
  