For the record: It's bad timing for Idan. He lives in Tel Aviv which is currently receiving intermittent rocket attacks. He may be a bit slow to respond. ;)
Let's wish him and his family safety and the luxury of worrying about django's admin in good time. On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:23 AM, Victor Hooi <victorh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm guessing there aren't any updates on this? Lol. > > Idan - you mentioned you'd like to get thoughts on what we hope to achieve > in a new admin - basically, what is the purpose of Django's contrib.admin - > is that right? > > Is there some place that people can brainstorm or contribute their thoughts > on this? Should somebody make a wiki page for collecting all this? > > Cheers, > Victor > > > On Friday, 18 May 2012 20:18:59 UTC+10, patrickk wrote: >> >> I agree with Idan. We mainly did Grappelli because of the look & feel (and >> then added some functionality like autocompletes). >> >> However, it just doesn´t make sense to simply "beautify" the existing >> admin-interface. Rethinking the functionality, adding flexibility, being >> able to customize ... these are all necessary steps IMHO, but I´m still >> missing a clear approach/roadmap on how/when this should happen. >> >> I planned to give a talk on djangocon.eu about how to improve the >> admin-interface. Unfortunately, I had to step back from that idea because of >> some customer-related projects. Still, the thoughts are there and I´m happy >> to discuss this issue anytime. This discussion could start with defining the >> so-called "trusted editor" – what does he/she knows resp. needs to know when >> dealing with the admin-interface? What are the consequences (e.g., does an >> editor care about an app-list, does he even know what it is)? What >> working-groups do we need (python, html/css, js, ...)? How can we publish >> the process/discussion? And much more ... let´s start ... but how? >> >> best, >> patrick >> >> >> Am Montag, 30. April 2012 23:41:14 UTC+2 schrieb Idan Gazit: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Monday, April 30, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Brett H wrote: >>> >>> > Increasing the flexibility for development and integration is more >>> > important than trying to 2nd guess where we are going to be in 5 years >>> > time. >>> >>> Fair enough, but that sort of flexibility is available now. Nothing is >>> preventing you from starting your 3rd-party admin app today. >>> >>> >>> >>> The issue is Django's officially-blessed, officially-documented admin. >>> I'm not sure it's better to have admin in contrib (or contrib at all, but >>> that's a separate ball of wax). I have a feeling that this issue will >>> probably be addressed once again now that we're on github. >>> >>> All the same, if there's going to be an official django admin, I'd like >>> it to give some thought to the issues I've raised. I have no problem (read: >>> would love) to draw upon existing solutions for an admin revamp, but right >>> now I don't have a fitness function to guide my decisions, and I think that >>> is necessary. Not a spec, just an attempt to step back and think about what >>> the admin should do. >>> >>> -I >>> >>> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django developers" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/-/CTFFiNcb9KMJ. > > 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. -- 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.
