On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Mike Orr <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 1:22 AM, Domen Kožar <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Few weeks ago I was thinking about a similar feature for WebHelpers.
>> Maybe a way to go is to create a ext namespace that would work like
>> third party services and everyone could release this utilities. I'm
>> sure everyone has some snippets in helpers that could solves somebody
>> else's problem. Just a thought.
>
> Additional helpers can be added by topic, hopefully to the existing
> namespaces, or to a new one if they cover very different ground.  You
> can post proposals through the ticket system

I don't think the namespace is a good idea. Webhelpers are too vague
as a standalone package and without some supervision that your
webhelpers actually work outside of your projects/world view, people
could start releasing a bunch of useless stuff. To some point I think
each webhelper that goes into the package needs to be discussed for
"community acceptance"

> (http://bitbucket.org/bbangert/webhelpers/issues/).  The main criteria
> is whether it looks like it would be used by a wide variety of users.
> (We  can't have too many little-used helpers or it'll turn into
> bloat.)  Any HTML should be generated by the HTML builder
> (webhelpers.html) to ensure well-formedness and proper quoting.
>
exactly, we need that check.

> Jorge's cloud stuff is big enough that it will need a package name and
> a maintainer.  Maybe webhelpers.cloud?
> Do you want to organize the
> sub-namespaces and maintain it, Jorge?

I'm not that far yet, I'm still in the "is this a good idea phase" I'm
not certain it's worth the troubles of a separate release cycle. But I
can contribute some code I have been working on (will be working on)
to generate a couple of these. I think we could start with a fork at
BB, and see how much this grows. If it demands it's own package then
we'll see how that ends up.

> I think it should go outside
> webhelpers.html because it may get big, and because some of the
> helpers may be more than just HTML generation.
>
+1 I also think that the ones needing JS should stick with pure-old
JS, because the moment you demand a library you end up with the old JS
problem in webhelpers.

> --
> Mike Orr <[email protected]>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to