On 8/8/07, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 8/8/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > A couple of other areas are going to be at least equally as > > interesting... > > Malcolm has made some *really* good points throughout this thread, and > I'm convinced that going down this path would be a not-so-good idea. > > My opinion on it at this point could be be classified as "blah," or > possibly "meh." > > I have a feeling that the underlying reason for wanting a standalone > django.template, deep in our collective subconscious, is that the > settings.configure() thing is inelegant. I shouldn't have to configure > anything just to use the template library. I should be able to import > django.template.Template and django.template.Context, and use them > immediately to render some text.
I think there's a good psychological / community case to be made for making django.template available standalone; as I put it earlier, many people just don't like importing stuff they don't intend to use, no matter how small it may be byte-wise. Requiring someone to install Django just to use the templating system is going to prevent them, in various cases, from bothering at all. > I think some work in this area *would* be worth it, as it would make > it easier to use Django's template language in a standalone setting > but would stop short of being a complete reorganization of the code > and architecture. I don't really intend for things to get *that* reorganized; packaging and whatnot aside, my goal is for django.template to work without the rest of Django installed. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
