W liście Marcin Kasperski z dnia piątek 23 listopada 2007: > redirect routes need some detailed design. > > a) There should be an easy way to define internal redirects. > Important thing here is that the destination url should be defined > using routes by itself. I am not sure about the syntax, but url_for > need not be available at the moment (for example, if redirects need > to be defined earlier than the destination routes) > > b) There should be some explicit way of selecting which kind of > redirect is to be performed (permanent, temporary, ...). > > c) In case of internal redirects it may make sense to handle > 'invisible redirect' (just picking the destination object using the > redirected-to route without generating any redirect to the browser) > as one of the methods.
I think that this does not belong to routes - but to pylons in general. In fact I believe that redirect function in routes is unnecessary - it should just take care of matching and generating urls, with no regard as to where the generated url is used. That would give a cleaner separation of concerns, and redirect function could just be defined in some layer using routes - and that function would accept parameters describing type of redirect (internal, moved permanently, moved temporarily, see other...) -- Paweł Stradomski --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" 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/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
