On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Tom von Schwerdtner <tomv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> But it would still save a few steps and it would be very easy to write. > > However, I think there is a bigger opportunity here to provide some simple > docs for the user Both good points. I have to say that I'm personally quite torn on this particular subject: as mentioned I've been taught that code generation is typically a "bad thing", but on the other hand it's *very* useful in spots (such as some [some!] of Rails' generators, for example) and there's just some positive feeling to using it that I can't put my finger on. All things in moderation, I guess is the key. Tom's doc point is also good; I'm wondering if this can give me ideas for how to restructure the tutorial that's currently between drafts, so that it could possibly be used as both a tutorial and this default fabfile. Finally -- I do like the idea of someone being able to waltz into whatever directory they want and do "fab --init" instead of having to start entirely from scratch -- especially since the fab tool can barely do anything but complain about a lack of fabfile until one exists. Just made a ticket for this: http://code.fabfile.org/issues/show/68 Thanks for the input! -Jeff _______________________________________________ Fab-user mailing list Fab-user@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fab-user
