I'm using appengine-patch to implement Django for a site I'm building,
and it's been very easy. Like Alex, I went to use that instead of
helper because I intend to handle authentication differently than what
comes default with webapp and django helper.

With the inclusion of zip import to appengine-patch it saved me a ton
of time.

Now, not to toot my own horn, but I did integrate appengine-utilities
session and flash into my implementation also. That was extremely
easy. Also, writing an authentication backend to support the google
accounts was a snap as well.

On Oct 21, 12:58 am, Alexander Kojevnikov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> About a month ago I migratedwww.muspy.comfrom webapp to Django 1.0
> using app-engine-patch. The main reason was to provide a custom
> authentication instead of the Google's.
>
> Regarding your questions:
>
> 1. The only issue I have 
> ishttp://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=772
> but I believe it's not specific to app-engine-patch.
>
> 2. I depend on < 200 lines of code provided by app-engine-patch to
> ease the implementation of custom authentication. This code could be
> easily rewritten or integrated to your app should you decide to
> migrate to vanilla Django. Migration from the datastore would take
> most time anyway.
>
> 3. See above. Very easy and very flexible.
>
> 4. After removing unused files from Django, my entire project is about
> 500 files. I didn't use zip imports and don't plan to.
>
> Hope this helps and let me know if you have other questions.
>
> --
> Alexwww.muspy.com
>
> On Oct 21, 7:56 am, johnP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hello, all -
>
> > I was curious if some users might provide some feedback about using
> > AppEngine Helper, Utilities, and Patch (or nothing at all...:))
>
> > Initially, appengine Helper seemed like a safe choice - because it was
> > sanctioned by the appengine team, and helped bridge the gap between
> > writing in pure django and writing on appengine.  It has over 1500
> > downloads.  It seems to continue being supported at a "moderate" pace
> > (is it a 20% project for someone at Google)?
>
> > Appengine Patch seems very interesting - it promises to allow you to
> > write in pure Django, excluding models.  This makes sense to me.  It
> > seems like it is being developed, and initially - looked like it is
> > well made.  Other positives are the included zip imports, and the
> > possibility of using my own authentication.  My primary concern is
> > that it is a layer that resides at the core of my application, and is
> > a potential source of issues (that are not being addressed by a large
> > community such as Google and Django community).
>
> > What I am looking for are the following:
> >   1.  Reliability.
> >   2.  Ability to write as closely to pure Django 1.0 as possible.
> >   3   Using my own user authentication, rather than Google's
> > (wonderful) solution.
> >   4.  Zip imports.
>
> > Can people provide their impressions, positive and negative, with
> > these different approaches?  They all seem very exciting - but an open
> > discussion would be welcomed.  Thanks -
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google App Engine" 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/google-appengine?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to