On Sep 18, 7:07 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 22:19 -0700, mrts wrote:
>
> Keep a handle on the scope. I was going to stay out of this thread until
> some actual code appeared (and I still have a note to re-review Vinay
> Sajip's stuff to remind myself why that isn't the solution yet, since
> there were some problems there from memory), but if you try to tie two
> somewhat unrelated things together, a *lot* of time is going to be
> wasted both by you, writing the code, by others who might actually be
> concentrating on the isolated problem and then thinking the two are
> co-dependent and by us in convincing everybody to separate them again.
>
> Application objects is something that was floated as a way to solve a
> very small, specific set of problems. It seems to be growing in scope by
> leaps and bounds and that needs to be reigned.Code that wants to
> demonstrate how application objects work shouldn't depend on any
> particular installation strategy. The applications will be right there,
> ready to be entered into the settings file. How those applications
> happened to become available is orthogonal to this in most respects. So
> keep installation strategies out of the code for application objects
> initially, please, so that we can test things out and examine the code
> in isolation.
>
I agree with Malcolm. I would certainly appreciate a review of the
#3591 patch and will try to address any concerns the core devs have
about it.
Regards,
Vinay Sajip
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
