The Django admin is a major—if not *the* major—selling point to budding developers. I worry that externalizing it (hence making it a *separate* piece of software that needs to be discovered and installed, which seems simple but can be quite a challenge to new coders) might take away Django's non-expert appeal. When I started using Django, I knew no python. The only reason I was able to make that work was because of the Django admin. If the admin gets kicked out, I think it should be made *very* obvious where to find one.
I'd be wary of putting them in core but I think using Bootstrap and Less for a new admin (whether internal or external) would make its development much faster. Dependencies should not be a problem. I think jQuery is a pretty apt analogy here. You probably won't write much javascript for the Django admin without learning jQuery. You can if you want to. But most people don't need or want to write javascript for the Django admin anyway. I think a framework like Bootstrap it would actually simplify adding new features. It provides so many CSS classes that there's a pretty good chance your feature wouldn't require you to write even a line of CSS. I was able to convert an unstyled app that I've been working on to functionally using Bootstrap in just about an hour after starting to learn it. That having been said, I'd still be cautious with Bootstrap. It is a young piece of software that is incredibly impressive and mind- bogglingly easy to use, but obviously still in flux. On Feb 2, 5:38 pm, Sean Brant <brant.s...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Alex Gaynor <alex.gay...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Adrian Holovaty <adr...@holovaty.com> wrote: > > >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Sean Brant <brant.s...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Is this up somewhere public? I've been fighting the urge to do this as > >> > well. Using django-compressor with less on Heroku is a non-starter > >> > since you can't install node. Having this as a Python module would be > >> > handy. > > >> Not yet, alas, but hopefully soon. > > >> Adrian > > >> -- > >> 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 > >> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > >> For more options, visit this group at > >>http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en. > > > Perhaps this is too far in the future looking. But at a certain point the > > admin must become a separate project. One of the major goals of > > newforms-admin ('lo those years ago) was to demote the admin from special > > status, with hooks inside core left and right, to "just an app". Let's > > carry that to the logical conclusion: just an app *outside of Django*. > > > That gives the maintainers the freedom to reinvent it, and use tools like > > less or bootstrap without it needing to be an issue of policy for all of > > Django. Because when I first read saw this thread my thought was, "Hmm, > > what unholy mess of requirements am I going to need if I want to just run > > the test suite. Will I still be able to write new features in forms without > > needing to learn what the hell less or compass is?". Several years ago, I > > opposed using jQuery in the admin, on the principle that Django should be > > completely free of entangling alliances. I made that argument more or less > > out of habit, just because I felt it was an argument that ought to be made, > > but really I was pretty happy to get to use jQuery. Now I'm saying, it's > > pretty clear that admin 2.0 (or 3.0, or 4.0, anyone counting?) is going to > > be a beast that far outstrips almost anything else in Djanog (besides the > > ORM ;)) in complexity, with more dependencies, more associated tooling, and > > more usecases (i.e. it's not just a tool for developers to use, it's also > > something for end users of *our* users' apps to use). Keeping that in > > Django itself is going to stunt it's growth, and it's going to suck for new > > developers to Django who, like many of us (or at least myself), were and > > still are, Python developers at heart, who can write some HTML, badly. > > > Alex > > > -- > > "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to > > say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire) > > "The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero > > > -- > > 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 > > django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en. > > +1 > > Given how flexible the admin is doing somethings is still pretty > annoying. I feel like if it was a external project with its own > release schedule more progress could be made. FWIW i'm experimenting > with an admin interface that relies heavily on class based views. So > far I like it. CBVs seem to have more useful hooks then the admin > currently has. At the very least I think the new admin needs to not be > backwards compatible with the current admin. > > So my vote is for django-admin2 as an external project. -- 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 django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
