Don't forget Django is a full stack framework, so plugins are easier to swap
as they rely on the same stack. One of the great things about Pylons is you
can cherry pick the best of breed components.
The downside of this are plugins for pylons would be coupled to the initial
implementations,
On Apr 28, 12:25 pm, Ben Bangert b...@groovie.org wrote:
The key difference between Django style re-use and repoze.bfg/Zope
style re-use is how much life is going to suck down the road
maintaining the apps. When you consider how Django approaches it, it
seems like this will be a pain
I've been having some luck using Trac's component architecture to create
plugins for my pylons project. Each plugin is installed using easy_install,
and registers itself with a certain entry point name, which is discovered by
the pylons app during startup. I have
- a Component which adds new
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 2:09 AM, Brennan Todd brent...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been having some luck using Trac's component architecture to create
plugins for my pylons project.
It would be pretty badass if there was a Pylons project shell that had
Trac like plugins that was open sourced.
Each
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Jonathan Vanasco jonat...@findmeon.comwrote:
The way Pylons works, you can't really consolidate all the Plugin
stuff as 'neatly' as with other systems: ie- you can't really do an
isolated tree that offers it's own MVC directories.
But you can do something
This is likely relevant to all the above discussion:
http://docs.repoze.org/plugin/
and:
http://svn.repoze.org/repoze.plugin/trunk/
At least its my best shot at creating something like the ZCA without
most of the baggage (no interfaces, no XML).
It works, but that's a pain if you need to put your Pylons
authorization system around it. As JonathanV said, Pylons is not
really structured to plug in mini-apps the way Django is.
This was the killer for Pylons for me, see:
On Apr 27, 2009, at 3:01 PM, Mike Orr wrote:
At PyCon, some of us experimented with a full plugin system (Zope
Component Architecture) as used in repoze.BFG. It's too early to tell
whether it would be feasable for a Pylons-like framework (and most of
the developers are too busy to pursue it
On Apr 28, 8:42 am, Randy Syring rsyr...@gmail.com wrote:
It works, but that's a pain if you need to put your Pylons
authorization system around it. As JonathanV said, Pylons is not
really structured to plug in mini-apps the way Django is.
This was the killer for Pylons for me, see:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Mike Orr sluggos...@gmail.com wrote:
It works, but that's a pain if you need to put your Pylons
authorization system around it.
It's not a real pain if you use repoze.who/what
As JonathanV said, Pylons is not
really structured to plug in mini-apps the way
On Apr 28, 2009, at 10:22 AM, Gael Pasgrimaud wrote:
ZCA can be a good thing, but it also can be a mess.
When you have too much interfaces and/or zcml in your code it can take
a few hours to retrieve where a bug came from.
Having a more advanced plugin system can be a good thing but what i
like
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Gael Pasgrimaud g...@gawel.org wrote:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Mike Orr sluggos...@gmail.com wrote:
It works, but that's a pain if you need to put your Pylons
authorization system around it.
It's not a real pain if you use repoze.who/what
Yes,
On Apr 28, 11:36 am, Mike Orr sluggos...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Gael Pasgrimaud g...@gawel.org wrote:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Mike Orr sluggos...@gmail.com wrote:
It works, but that's a pain if you need to put your Pylons
authorization system around
Previously Mike Orr wrote:
The most difficult problem seems to be controllers, and the
'controller_scan' argument in Routes which seems useless. (We had to
hardcode the controllers in our GUI BILS app because of some
incompatibility with py2exe.) Several people have asked how to have
On Apr 28, 2009, at 2:43 PM, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
If you decide to use zope.component a controller could be a named
utility. You could then register it like so:
class BaseController(object):
This is the standard Pylons base controller class.
implements(IPylonsController)
class
Previously Ben Bangert wrote:
On Apr 28, 2009, at 2:43 PM, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
If you decide to use zope.component a controller could be a named
utility. You could then register it like so:
class BaseController(object):
This is the standard Pylons base controller class.
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Ben Bangert b...@groovie.org wrote:
On Apr 28, 2009, at 2:43 PM, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
If you decide to use zope.component a controller could be a named
utility. You could then register it like so:
class BaseController(object):
This is the standard
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 12:19 AM, Wichert Akkerman wich...@wiggy.net wrote:
Previously Ben Bangert wrote:
On Apr 28, 2009, at 2:43 PM, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
If you decide to use zope.component a controller could be a named
utility. You could then register it like so:
class
On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 15:09 -0700, Ben Bangert wrote:
On Apr 28, 2009, at 2:43 PM, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
If you decide to use zope.component a controller could be a named
utility. You could then register it like so:
class BaseController(object):
This is the standard Pylons
On Apr 28, 12:25 pm, Ben Bangert b...@groovie.org wrote:
The key difference between Django style re-use and repoze.bfg/Zope
style re-use is how much life is going to suck down the road
maintaining the apps. When you consider how Django approaches it, it
seems like this will be a pain
On Sunday, April 26, 2009, Gael Pasgrimaud g...@gawel.org wrote:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Kless jonas@googlemail.com wrote:
Does Pylons is going to build a plugin system for that can be easily
shared/re-used the applications? As is made in Django.
You can already plug any
On Apr 27, 11:55 am, Eric Lemoine eric.lemo...@camptocamp.com wrote:
On Sunday, April 26, 2009, Gael Pasgrimaud g...@gawel.org wrote:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Kless jonas@googlemail.com wrote:
Does Pylons is going to build a plugin system for that can be easily
I've been working on such a project, and its a bit of a PITA..
The way Pylons works, you can't really consolidate all the Plugin
stuff as 'neatly' as with other systems: ie- you can't really do an
isolated tree that offers it's own MVC directories.
But you can do something where you can import
On Apr 27, 12:22 pm, Jonathan Vanasco jonat...@findmeon.com wrote:
I've been working on such a project, and its a bit of a PITA..
The way Pylons works, you can't really consolidate all the Plugin
stuff as 'neatly' as with other systems: ie- you can't really do an
isolated tree that offers
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Wyatt Baldwin
wyatt.lee.bald...@gmail.com wrote:
On Apr 27, 12:22 pm, Jonathan Vanasco jonat...@findmeon.com wrote:
I've been working on such a project, and its a bit of a PITA..
The way Pylons works, you can't really consolidate all the Plugin
stuff as
At PyCon, some of us experimented with a full plugin system (Zope
Component Architecture) as used in repoze.BFG. It's too early to tell
whether it would be feasable for a Pylons-like framework (and most of
the developers are too busy to pursue it right now). But the
theoretical idea would
Does Pylons is going to build a plugin system for that can be easily
shared/re-used the applications? As is made in Django.
I know that TG2 is working on that. And I think that it's also
important that pylons integrates a plugin system, this could speed up
the grow up of pylons applications and
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Kless jonas@googlemail.com wrote:
Does Pylons is going to build a plugin system for that can be easily
shared/re-used the applications? As is made in Django.
You can already plug any wsgi application/middleware to pylons. see
28 matches
Mail list logo
