Mike Orr wrote: > On 10/22/07, Alberto Valverde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> - hard to use (basically no docs) >> Fair enough. This is something I would really have liked to solve long >> ago but seems like some sort of mental blockade of mine. I've tried my >> best to personally give support in TW's mailing list to anyone needing >> help (secretly hoping users would fill the docs gap :) but experience >> has shown it's no substitute for real documentation. I hope to have time >> to change this soon. > > The lack of documentation has been the main reason I haven't stepped > into the the ToscaWidgets learning curve yet. > > If you know me, you know that documentation is my forte, so I'll be > writing at least a Pylons-ToscaWidgets howto and a > FormEncode-ToscaWidgets comparision once I know enough to do it.
Your SQLAlchemy 0.4 tutorial made me brave enough to make the jump from 0.3 :) I'd really appreciate any effort in the docs area. Thanks! > Alberto, is the ToscaWidgets trunk kept reasonably stable? Meaning, > Cheetah has a rule that all changes have to pass the unittests before > being checked in, and backward compatibility is generally maintained, > so that the trunk is almost always more usable and less buggy than the > last release. Pylons, SQLAlchemy, and Supervisor seem to have a > similar attitude because I've had good luck with their trunks. Does > ToscaWidgets keep a clean trunk too? I try my best to keep it that way. Unit tests always pass before anything is committed and there haven't been any major API changes since I first released it. Keep in mind TW didn't start from scratch but evolved from TG's widgets. trying to mimic their API as much as possible (except some small improvements and new functionallity, namely being able to mix and match templating engines). What I'm trying to say with this is that most API experiments already took place before TW was born. > Is it safe enough for > application development, knowing that we may have to change our API > calls occasionally? Yes. TW hasn't even got a "stable" release yet so the trunk is as stable as it can be. All eggs that have been packaged are really snapshots of the trunk and experiments take place in separate branches before being merged and announced in the mailing list. Today I merged a breaking change which aims to reduce all the boiler plate needed to configure TW in Pylons as described by James' "An Alternative ToscaWidgets Setup with Mako" [1] (which, BTW, I should update, as soon as confluence mails me my lost passwd, to reflect the changes...). However, this change will not affect existing widgets, only the way TW's middleware is initialized. Are there any anticipated changes which will > change the API? I expect a little breakage in the public API to take place before 1.0 is out since I want to remove the RuleDispatch dependency. However, I don't think it will affect many users (if any at all) since it uses an obscure feature (adapt_value()) involving generic functions which I haven't seen in the wild. I might also rename the package name to "tw" and move the widget packages inside the tw namespace (ie: tw.forms, tw.mochikit, etc...) to avoid the redundant "from toscawidgets.widgets import foo". This should be easily aliased and "DeprecationWarned" though... Alberto [1] http://wiki.pylonshq.com/x/B4A1 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
