I find that each app having it's own settings makes the app more portable and opens up new possibilities, for example loading apps at runtime which should be theoretically possible but I guess it's hard to achieve and this point in time.
Erik On 15.09.2008, at 12:31, Thomas Guettler wrote: > > daonb schrieb: >> IMHO installing a new app should require user intervention. I don't >> want to see new apps magically popping out and I don't want to >> dynamically load anyone else's settings.py. > I agree. I think an app needs to "mounted" (like a unix file system) > to > a URL. It should not pop up magically. The name should be configured > by the project admin. > >> I love the code I get from >> pluggable apps but I prefer to keep settings.py for myself... >> Why not have a manage.py *installapp* command that takes an app >> folder >> and adds its code and documentation to the current project. Among >> other things it can do is to create a symbolic link to the new code >> and append settings.py with the app-specifics settings. installapp >> will not rewrite settings.py but only add code to its bottom, adding >> app-specific blocks with the apps variables and defaults. >> > Sorry, I disagree. Altering settings.py with a script is not a good > solution. I think > every app should have its own settings files (it needs app specific > settings). > > I think it is still a long way to get pluggable apps, but I hope the > django maintainers > will get it right. > > Thomas > > -- > Thomas Guettler, http://www.thomas-guettler.de/ > E-Mail: guettli (*) thomas-guettler + de > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
