I was about to suggest adding that to the FAQ but then I realized it's already there. http://mezzanine.jupo.org/docs/frequently-asked-questions.html#why-are-grappelli-and-filebrowser-forked
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Stephen McDonald <[email protected]> wrote: > The forks have diverged from their origins significantly - features > removed, Mezzanine specific things added. The fact they're separate repos > from Mezzanine is insignificant, their code bases might as well be part of > Mezzanine itself. This has been thrashed out multiple times on this list > already. > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Derek Adair <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I've spent about 1-2 hours looking for this specific subject on this >> forum and in google in general and i'm not getting much results other than >> this >> page >> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/mezzanine-users/grappelli$20alternative$20%7Csort:relevance/mezzanine-users/Z9R4XX7K1B8/MyCW2Gia-EsJ> >> which >> pretty much confirms that its just not been done b/c its a lot of work AND >> *there >> really isn't much reason too*? is that correct? I really am coming from >> the same perspective of the poster in that thread and i'm just trying to >> get a feel for what the best option is. >> >> Could you maybe give me a tl;dr; other than just not worth the effort? >> Just trying to understand. >> >> On Saturday, March 12, 2016 at 6:30:55 PM UTC-6, Derek Adair wrote: >>> >>> Thank you for updating those repositories it just didn't paint a very >>> good picture when i'm trying to debug issues and it looks like a very >>> stagnant project. >>> >>> I'll do some more digging but I really just wanted to engage the >>> community to see if anyone else has done any work on this or gauge the >>> interest. based on the responses it sounds like pretty much no. >>> >>> On Saturday, March 12, 2016 at 2:42:22 PM UTC-6, Stephen McDonald wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 7:19 AM, Derek Adair <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> 1. Better support from the grapelli project. There are issue's >>>>> that are ancient in both repositories with zero interaction from the >>>>> project owners. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> There were 9 open issues across the grappelli/filebrowser forks a >>>> moment ago - half of them were out of date and long ago resolved, so I've >>>> closed those now. Among the remaining are a couple of feature requests, a >>>> couple of obscure platform issues (Windows etc), and the one that you >>>> recently commented on. >>>> >>>> So realistically, there's one issue - the one you claim to have lost a >>>> lot of time on. Let's not get carried away here. >>>> >>>> >>>>> 1. There are almost NO docs on either of these projects. Any >>>>> issues are very complicated to debug because of this. >>>>> 2. The longer this project waits to do this the harder it will >>>>> be. Best to just get this over with now. >>>>> 3. Less work. Why even bother maintaining a fork when those >>>>> reasons have presumably been resolved. >>>>> >>>>> This should have been done immediately once it was at all possible to >>>>> for all of the above reasons. I haven't even really compared feature >>>>> sets these are just philosophical reasons why I believe upgrading is >>>>> the right decision here. However, I *completely* get why it has been >>>>> put off. This kind of work is *horrible* and rife with potential >>>>> breaking changes. >>>>> >>>>> I'll get back to you with some features, as for specific rasons there >>>>> are some pain points in integrating with django storages/s3boto... which >>>>> would have been alleviated in the new grapelli version. The new >>>>> filebrowser looks to be a lot cleaner with handling 3rd party integrations >>>>> (like s3boto). >>>>> >>>>> I'm also just curious why this hasn't been done and doesn't really >>>>> seem to even be talked about. >>>>> >>>> >>>> It's been talked about extensively on this list many times, if you dig >>>> around you'll be able to paint a much clearer picture than all the >>>> conclusions you've jumped to. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> It seems like an obvious win if it is at all possible, maybe its not! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Saturday, March 12, 2016 at 10:43:01 AM UTC-6, Ryne Everett wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm pretty set on figuring out a way to leverage the new grapelli >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Are there specific features you want? "Newer is better" isn't going >>>>>> to get much traction around here, but if you can point to advantages that >>>>>> cannot be realistically achieved in grapelli-safe that might be >>>>>> compelling. >>>>>> >>>>>> At any rate, what I would probably do is try to fork and upgrade >>>>>> mezzanine-grappelli. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Derek Adair <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I found this <https://pypi.python.org/pypi/mezzanine-grappelli> project >>>>>>> but its about 2 years w/o seeing any action, and is built w/ 3.0 not >>>>>>> 4.0. >>>>>>> I filed an issue asking what was up with the project and why was it >>>>>>> abandoned to maybe get some insight to see if this was even a good idea >>>>>>> or >>>>>>> not. I'm pretty set on figuring out a way to leverage the new grapelli >>>>>>> so >>>>>>> I'm just wondering if anyone else has any thoughts or work put towards >>>>>>> these efforts. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm additionally considering just flat out forking mezzanine if an >>>>>>> upgrade path is too difficult or impossible.... as I have no code >>>>>>> implemented in this framework, yet. Just trying to think long-term >>>>>>> here. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Friday, March 11, 2016 at 12:06:11 PM UTC-6, Derek Adair wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Is there any reason not to be using the official grapelli now? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "Mezzanine Users" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "Mezzanine Users" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Stephen McDonald >>>> http://jupo.org >>>> >>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Mezzanine Users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > Stephen McDonald > http://jupo.org > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Mezzanine Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mezzanine Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
