Hi Benoit-
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 06:16:55PM +0100, Benoit Chesneau wrote:
> Thanks for the change :) Seem ok for me and regress tests pass here too.
Cool -- thanks for testing!
> However, jinja 1 is a little outdated. Maybe it's better to go
> with jinja2 now ? Anyway, I've made a little port of it based on
> your changes on py-jinja. Regress tests pass and some apps (like
> friendpaste.com) are ok with it too. Find it attached.
I also whipped up a port of Jinja2. Some comments on your version:
* Add devel/py-nose to REGRESS_DEPENDS
* docs should go to ${PREFIX}/share/doc/py-jinja2 (as in
www/py-jinja)
I'm not aware of anything yet that requires Jinja2, but I wouldn't
mind having it in the tree. Do other porters have opinions on this?
Should we have www/py-jinja and www/py-jinja2? Since it seems like
both will be maintained for at least the nearish term and the
modules don't use conflicting namespaces, I think we might as well.
Thanks!
--
o--------------------------{ Will Maier }--------------------------o
| web:.......http://www.lfod.us/ | email.........willma...@ml1.net |
*---------------------[ BSD: Live Free or Die ]--------------------*
