Re: Blog engine
Forest Bond escribió:
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 05:49:54PM -, Henrik Lied wrote:
>
>> @Forest: I agree, it should be that simple. But let's say you've got a
>> comment reply plugin. How would we - through a middleware - manage to
>> intercept our usual comment system, and modify the HTML template
>> source to fit the plugin? It's cases like these I see the potential
>> pitfalls of our way of thought. Please, enlighten me if the answer is
>> simple. :-)
>>
>
> Well, extensibility is tough for exactly that reason. You have to anticipate
> the ways in which your application might be extended. This is an extremely
> difficult task, for that simple reason that it is impossible to predict the
> future.
>
> You really don't want to be modifying templates (or any other source files)
> when
> a new plugin is installed. What you do want is to have placeholders in your
> templates where plugins may contribute additional markup that will appear on
> the
> page.
>
> -Forest
>
What most of you take as prototype is wordpress. And there are quite
some plugins requiring you to modify your templates. If a plugin is to
actually *output* anything into a template, it might have a few template
files that define an outcome. Then, you must only {% include %} that
file in an appropiate place. Seems flexible enough to me, while newbies
do only have to copy-paste the include tag into their template.
Of course, if the templating engine is solid, themes are to be released,
and, as with wordpress, there can be many themes like K2, that are
already aware of many most-used plugins.
Just to make it clear. It's still the template's job to take care of
display. The plugin must not *modify* a single source file, as stated above.
And, Forest, if you provide enough hooks where plugins can join the
app's flow (like the plugin middleware, and the template imports),
you're done predicting the future. We just have to think about the right
places where to place hooks.
Actually, is there anyone *really* able to contribute some code to this
endeavour?
Chris
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 05:49:54PM -, Henrik Lied wrote: > @Forest: I agree, it should be that simple. But let's say you've got a > comment reply plugin. How would we - through a middleware - manage to > intercept our usual comment system, and modify the HTML template > source to fit the plugin? It's cases like these I see the potential > pitfalls of our way of thought. Please, enlighten me if the answer is > simple. :-) Well, extensibility is tough for exactly that reason. You have to anticipate the ways in which your application might be extended. This is an extremely difficult task, for that simple reason that it is impossible to predict the future. You really don't want to be modifying templates (or any other source files) when a new plugin is installed. What you do want is to have placeholders in your templates where plugins may contribute additional markup that will appear on the page. -Forest -- Forest Bond http://www.alittletooquiet.net signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Blog engine
@Forest: I agree, it should be that simple. But let's say you've got a comment reply plugin. How would we - through a middleware - manage to intercept our usual comment system, and modify the HTML template source to fit the plugin? It's cases like these I see the potential pitfalls of our way of thought. Please, enlighten me if the answer is simple. :-) --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
On Sat, Jul 28, 2007 at 03:28:31PM -, Henrik Lied wrote: > > Ok, so I've been thinking some more. > > The model could be something like this: > class Plugin(models.Model): > """(Plugin description)""" > pointer = models.FilePathField() ## Could work, right? > name = models.CharField(maxlength=200) > description = models.TextField(blank=True, null=True) > url = models.URLField() > apply_to = models.ForeignKey(ContentType) > active = models.BooleanField(default=False) > > We then would have to make a standard on how the plugin-packages would > be designed. > A zip-file would probably work out OK. We would then have to get this > zip-file, run through it and copy its files into a plugins- > subdirectory. The package should have a info.txt-document, where the > plugin title would be on the first line and description on the second. > > But - I'm still not sure how we'd easily hook this into other > applications - at least not without the user having to modify the > source code... See twisted.plugin. Define your interfaces, and let twisted handle the rest. Don't pull a PHP-ism like forcing users to modify code. That is, by definition, not a plugin architecture. -Forest -- Forest Bond http://www.alittletooquiet.net signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Blog engine
Henrik Lied escribió: > When you say "installs", do you mean that the plugin is retrieved from > the external site, and placed somewhere on the users host, or is it > constantly querying the plugin on a remote computer? > > The first of those two options would definitely be the best. But I'm > having some problems working it out IRL: > Let's say you've just installed the Akismet-plugin. How are we > supposed to notify the comment framework that a new plugin has been > installed - and better yet - how it should use it? This is a valid > problem for almost every plugin. If we manage to resolve a good answer > to that question, I'm done being a critic. :-) > The first version should do ;) As for your question about "letting the comment app know", it would be a nice idea to keep looking at django for answers. Does this situations sound familiar? I was thinking of middleware. You might "register" a plugin to work agains some app (or apps) and therefor, make the app(s) call certain methods within the plugin. The plugin would only have to implement those methods. If we do the "registering" stuff at database level, it would be a snap to automate the installation. Only, the apps need to know that they must call something. Definately, the current django apps (like comments) do not behave that way, and hacking them is not the answer. What about a plugin middleware? It could check incoming requests for certain data in the request (perhaps a post key?) and do something accordingly. If there's a way to make this approach work with a single middleware (BlogPluginMiddleware?) this would be a pretty nice beginning :-) Chris signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Blog engine
Ok, so I've been thinking some more. The model could be something like this: class Plugin(models.Model): """(Plugin description)""" pointer = models.FilePathField() ## Could work, right? name = models.CharField(maxlength=200) description = models.TextField(blank=True, null=True) url = models.URLField() apply_to = models.ForeignKey(ContentType) active = models.BooleanField(default=False) We then would have to make a standard on how the plugin-packages would be designed. A zip-file would probably work out OK. We would then have to get this zip-file, run through it and copy its files into a plugins- subdirectory. The package should have a info.txt-document, where the plugin title would be on the first line and description on the second. But - I'm still not sure how we'd easily hook this into other applications - at least not without the user having to modify the source code... --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
When you say "installs", do you mean that the plugin is retrieved from the external site, and placed somewhere on the users host, or is it constantly querying the plugin on a remote computer? The first of those two options would definitely be the best. But I'm having some problems working it out IRL: Let's say you've just installed the Akismet-plugin. How are we supposed to notify the comment framework that a new plugin has been installed - and better yet - how it should use it? This is a valid problem for almost every plugin. If we manage to resolve a good answer to that question, I'm done being a critic. :-) --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
Henrik Lied escribió: > This is great, Chris, but the fact of the matter is that it won't > appeal to the "Wordpress crowd". > That group wants in-browser setup, easy plugin architecture etc. > contrib.admin wouldn't do the trick. The admin-panel would have to be > hand made. > > For the plugin architecture: I have no idea how we'd do this well. Any > input here? > It *could* be done in a Facebook Apps-manner (the actual code is > remotely hosted, the admin-panel would show a list of available > plugins), but I don't know how ideal this would be in a real world > scenario. It sure would be great, though! > > > On Jul 25, 12:06 am, "Chris Moffitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I think I mentioned earlier in this thread, that I do have my take on >> creating a blog here >> -http://www.satchmoproject.com/trac/browser/satchmoproject.com/satchmo... >> >> It's pretty full featured right now and makes use of the tagging and >> comment_utils libraries. It still needs the feeds but that should be pretty >> simple. It's BSD licensed so hopefully it will be useful to folks. >> >> -Chris >> > > > > > What about the symphony way of plugins? You have a page in the admin with the latest plugins available (rss?) and you just click one and the app downloads and istalls it. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
This is great, Chris, but the fact of the matter is that it won't appeal to the "Wordpress crowd". That group wants in-browser setup, easy plugin architecture etc. contrib.admin wouldn't do the trick. The admin-panel would have to be hand made. For the plugin architecture: I have no idea how we'd do this well. Any input here? It *could* be done in a Facebook Apps-manner (the actual code is remotely hosted, the admin-panel would show a list of available plugins), but I don't know how ideal this would be in a real world scenario. It sure would be great, though! On Jul 25, 12:06 am, "Chris Moffitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think I mentioned earlier in this thread, that I do have my take on > creating a blog here > -http://www.satchmoproject.com/trac/browser/satchmoproject.com/satchmo... > > It's pretty full featured right now and makes use of the tagging and > comment_utils libraries. It still needs the feeds but that should be pretty > simple. It's BSD licensed so hopefully it will be useful to folks. > > -Chris --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
I think I mentioned earlier in this thread, that I do have my take on creating a blog here - http://www.satchmoproject.com/trac/browser/satchmoproject.com/satchmo_website/apps It's pretty full featured right now and makes use of the tagging and comment_utils libraries. It still needs the feeds but that should be pretty simple. It's BSD licensed so hopefully it will be useful to folks. -Chris --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
This sounds great. I created a project on Google Code: http://code.google.com/p/django-blog-engine/ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
On 20 Jul 2007, at 8:49 pm, James Bennett wrote: On 7/20/07, Rob Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: #2 is particularly interesting to me because I've written a simple blog in Django and there are some non-obvious things that having a reference implementation to look at would be nice. Things like: To be fair, though, a lot of these things are already implemented, as part of Django itself, as contrib applications or as freely-available third-party applications. * Feeds (Atom, RSS, both) django.contrib.syndication * Comments (with spam filters) django.conrtib.comments + comment_utils * Open-ID enabled comments? There are a couple good OpenID implementations around; Simon Willison's already doing OpenID for comments and has written up how he did it. * Writing a script executed by cron to pull content from other sources and save them to your models. (I did this for Magnolia recently.) http://code.google.com/p/jellyroll/ Pretty sure I mentioned most of these earlier in the thread... -- David Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Blog engine
Hi Kyle, On 7/18/07, Kyle Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It's easy to write a "basic" blog in Django. If that's all people > want, then great. Something like that will work perfectly for the > majority of bloggers (who probably won't get that much readership > anyway)... > > But all this talk about making a "full-featured" blog app in Django -- > one that will really get noticed (and thus get django noticed): what > we need is a blog with *more features* that could actually begin to > compete with something like Wordpress**. Ok, not 20 minutes but 10 hours. Just start it. No one stops you from doing it. Kai --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
On 7/20/07, Rob Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > #2 is particularly interesting to me because I've written a simple > blog in Django and there are some non-obvious things that having a > reference implementation to look at would be nice. Things like: To be fair, though, a lot of these things are already implemented, as part of Django itself, as contrib applications or as freely-available third-party applications. > * Feeds (Atom, RSS, both) django.contrib.syndication > * Comments (with spam filters) django.conrtib.comments + comment_utils > * Open-ID enabled comments? There are a couple good OpenID implementations around; Simon Willison's already doing OpenID for comments and has written up how he did it. > * Writing a script executed by cron to pull content from other sources > and save them to your models. (I did this for Magnolia recently.) http://code.google.com/p/jellyroll/ etc. -- "Bureaucrat Conrad, you are technically correct -- the best kind of correct." --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
A lot of the same arguments against making a standard blog project could probably be applied to Rails, but here's a blog app in Rails... http://simplelog.net/ I think an open-source Django blog project would be good because 1) It would be Usable to many (as evidenced by this thread and others before) 2) Useful to many as a reference and resource #2 is particularly interesting to me because I've written a simple blog in Django and there are some non-obvious things that having a reference implementation to look at would be nice. Things like: * Feeds (Atom, RSS, both) * Comments (with spam filters) * Open-ID enabled comments? * Grouping blogs and links and whatever other objects by date using generic relations (possibly?) * Previewing links that aren't "published" yet, possibly using the ADMINS option, while returning a 404 for anyone else? * Writing a script executed by cron to pull content from other sources and save them to your models. (I did this for Magnolia recently.) * etc. If anyone wants to start one I'd be interesting in joining in and playing. -Rob --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
Stefan Matthias Aust escribió: > Chris, > > 2007/7/19, Chris Hoeppner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> There would still be the problem of people wanting to >> "one-click-install" plugins and themes. But why would such a person even >> think about using a framework instead of wordpress? > > My point was that - assuming the Django community wants to spread the > word that Django is the best answer to whatever question - that you > have to target people who just want to use an application and > demonstrate the greatness. This requires a momentum, a community. > > If you just not want to bother those people and do not want to be > bothered, then, well, let them use Wordpress :) > > All I tried to say is perhaps that people who are looking for a simple > to use blogging solution might want to get there with the least amount > of work. Installing Wordpress is damn easy. Everybody with "computer > knowledge" therefore typically recommends Wordpress (let's not dive > into the discussion here that PHP is nearly always preinstalled and > Python not). > > Would you recommend your non-technical friends to go and install > Python and Django, then to compile a common repository of stuff > grabbed from all over the web and then to write their own custom > blogging solution because it's so easy? I guess not :) > Depends. If they're non-technical but willing to learn, yes. And I'd assist them. If they're just stupid and want it to "just plain work" then I'd tell them to go and buy a book about "windows for dummies". And I don't mean that I *would*, but more that I *have done many times*. Some of them come back after a while, knowing a bit more, and wanting to learn. Others just don't bother me ever again. I like both of them :-) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Blog engine
Chris, 2007/7/19, Chris Hoeppner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > There would still be the problem of people wanting to > "one-click-install" plugins and themes. But why would such a person even > think about using a framework instead of wordpress? My point was that - assuming the Django community wants to spread the word that Django is the best answer to whatever question - that you have to target people who just want to use an application and demonstrate the greatness. This requires a momentum, a community. If you just not want to bother those people and do not want to be bothered, then, well, let them use Wordpress :) All I tried to say is perhaps that people who are looking for a simple to use blogging solution might want to get there with the least amount of work. Installing Wordpress is damn easy. Everybody with "computer knowledge" therefore typically recommends Wordpress (let's not dive into the discussion here that PHP is nearly always preinstalled and Python not). Would you recommend your non-technical friends to go and install Python and Django, then to compile a common repository of stuff grabbed from all over the web and then to write their own custom blogging solution because it's so easy? I guess not :) -- Stefan Matthias Aust --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
Stefan Matthias Aust escribió: > If it is so easy to create a blogging application with Django, then > this should be an argument for a standard application, not against it > IMHO. > > At minimum, it could become a nice example application, either as part > of the django distribution or as a separate download. And if it is > still easy enough, make it a Wordpress killer. Make it as easy to > install and to use as Wordpress, being an example for the power of > elegance of Django (and Python) - something like Typo or Mephisto for > Rails. > > Another important argument for one de-facto standard are plug-ins and > templates. There are zillions of templates (even nice ones) for > Wordpress. And you can add dozens if not hundreds of plugins to > further customize or extend the software. > > If everybody is creating his or her own solution, there will not be no > synergy, no community, no attention. Rails became so popular, > because people *saw* how easy it was to create something. Just telling > them isn't enough :) > > Stefan > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django users" group. > To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en > -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- > Actually... It took me 30 minutes to get my blog engine running, without the design. And, there's no need to "make" for plugins. A Django app *is* a plugin to the django framework itself, if you'd like to see it that way. I have a common repository on the python path with things I tend to use often, like typogrify, markdown, and feedparser. You can just load them from any other app. There would still be the problem of people wanting to "one-click-install" plugins and themes. But why would such a person even think about using a framework instead of wordpress? And I still think that there's absolutely no need to make a de-facto standard blog app in django. You gotta use what works best for you, man. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Blog engine
Why not start a Google code repository and see how many people want to chip in and help. This comes up often enough that it sounds like there's enough interest. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
If it is so easy to create a blogging application with Django, then this should be an argument for a standard application, not against it IMHO. At minimum, it could become a nice example application, either as part of the django distribution or as a separate download. And if it is still easy enough, make it a Wordpress killer. Make it as easy to install and to use as Wordpress, being an example for the power of elegance of Django (and Python) - something like Typo or Mephisto for Rails. Another important argument for one de-facto standard are plug-ins and templates. There are zillions of templates (even nice ones) for Wordpress. And you can add dozens if not hundreds of plugins to further customize or extend the software. If everybody is creating his or her own solution, there will not be no synergy, no community, no attention. Rails became so popular, because people *saw* how easy it was to create something. Just telling them isn't enough :) Stefan --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
It's easy to write a "basic" blog in Django. If that's all people want, then great. Something like that will work perfectly for the majority of bloggers (who probably won't get that much readership anyway)... But all this talk about making a "full-featured" blog app in Django -- one that will really get noticed (and thus get django noticed): what we need is a blog with *more features* that could actually begin to compete with something like Wordpress**. I mean stuff like Akismet, Flickr integration, delicious/magnolia bookmarks, multi-author (with per-object permissions), importing from Wordpress, statistics, easy web-based installation (NOT easy_install but a wizard someone could follow, like the Wordpress install, lots of customization, integration with pingback services, etc. If that sounds like a lot, that's because it is. To even be a blip on the screen it will need this kind of stuff. I also doubt the django- admin will be sufficient for an application like this. I know a lot of the stuff I've mentioned above has already been hammered out by djangonauts -- I'm sure a snippet for almost every feature has been posted on djangosnippets.org. It's a matter of bringing all those together into something that works out of the box, rather than everyone patching together their own frankenstein. ** By the way, I know "competing with Wordpress" is nearly impossible. I'm just saying that to accomplish what it sounds like people here are talking about, we need close to the same level of functionality. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
We don't need such an app (well, I don't need it). If I want it, I write it in 20 minutes. :-) Kai --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
On 18-Jul-07, at 11:31 AM, James Bennett wrote: > So I'm not necessarily convinced that there's a great need for a > "standard" Django blog application; it would appease some folks, but I > have a feeling that in the Django world a lot of people really would > be happier, in the long run, writing their own app that does what they > need except for nesh's thumbnails, i have always found it quicker to roll my own things rather than spend time bolting on someone else's app to my app. -- regards kg http://lawgon.livejournal.com http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
I wrote a blogging system for myself that can be had through subversion at this url: http://svn.karmazilla.net/hobby_projects/Djogg I'm still looking for a good place to deploy my own instance, though. I've kinda given up getting it to work in dreamhost. On Jul 18, 8:01 am, "James Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/18/07, Paulo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > No to mention a good blog app that people can standardize on would be > > a nice alternative to Wordpress[1] and Simplelog[2]. Having one would > > definitely be helpful in the "spreading the word about Django" > > department. > > I'm not entirely disinterested since I've been working on rewriting my > own blogging application to be released open source, but... > > I think part of the reason that there isn't a "standard" blog > application built on Django is simply the fact that it's so easy -- > it's quite literally a couple dozen lines of code to get a simple blog > application. A model for entries and a URLConf which routes to generic > views are all the Python you need to write, and then the generic views > and bundled applications in django.conrtrib -- admin, auth and > comments -- will do the rest. And if you want something more, it's > generally easier to be writing your own custom code from the start so > you can tailor things exactly how you want them. > > Rails doesn't offer those sorts of components (from what I know of the > development team's choices, it's largely a philosophical matter, much > as we don't offer tight integration of a JavaScript toolkit), which > means that it's easier and more efficient for Rails users to > standardize on and contribute code to a single application which can > implement all the necessary bits. > > So I'm not necessarily convinced that there's a great need for a > "standard" Django blog application; it would appease some folks, but I > have a feeling that in the Django world a lot of people really would > be happier, in the long run, writing their own app that does what they > need (trying to encourage that is one reason why I keep spinning off > bits of code from my blog into standalone applications -- when I do > eventually finish my rewrite and release everything, I'd like people > to be able to pick and choose the bits they want). > > -- > "Bureaucrat Conrad, you are technically correct -- the best kind of correct." --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
On 7/18/07, Paulo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No to mention a good blog app that people can standardize on would be > a nice alternative to Wordpress[1] and Simplelog[2]. Having one would > definitely be helpful in the "spreading the word about Django" > department. I'm not entirely disinterested since I've been working on rewriting my own blogging application to be released open source, but... I think part of the reason that there isn't a "standard" blog application built on Django is simply the fact that it's so easy -- it's quite literally a couple dozen lines of code to get a simple blog application. A model for entries and a URLConf which routes to generic views are all the Python you need to write, and then the generic views and bundled applications in django.conrtrib -- admin, auth and comments -- will do the rest. And if you want something more, it's generally easier to be writing your own custom code from the start so you can tailor things exactly how you want them. Rails doesn't offer those sorts of components (from what I know of the development team's choices, it's largely a philosophical matter, much as we don't offer tight integration of a JavaScript toolkit), which means that it's easier and more efficient for Rails users to standardize on and contribute code to a single application which can implement all the necessary bits. So I'm not necessarily convinced that there's a great need for a "standard" Django blog application; it would appease some folks, but I have a feeling that in the Django world a lot of people really would be happier, in the long run, writing their own app that does what they need (trying to encourage that is one reason why I keep spinning off bits of code from my blog into standalone applications -- when I do eventually finish my rewrite and release everything, I'd like people to be able to pick and choose the bits they want). -- "Bureaucrat Conrad, you are technically correct -- the best kind of correct." --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
It's definitely a good idea to roll your own but it is helpful to see other code to help you out. I'm in the process of adding a blog to satchmo and have uploaded the code to svn but have not put it into production. As it stands now, the code works but does not have comments enabled yet. If nothing else, it's a good reference to help you out. http://www.satchmoproject.com/trac/browser/satchmoproject.com/satchmo_website/apps/blog -Chris --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
On 17 Jul 2007, at 11:37 am, Eratothene wrote: There a lot of other features missing in such solution: comments, spam protection, rss feeds and a lot more. I am searching for full featured blog engine. Django has it's own comment feature in contrib which with James Bennett's comment-utils [0] has spam protection and moderation. RSS feeds are easily done within Django [1] Next? 0 - http://www.b-list.org/weblog/2007/06/25/hacking-comments-without- hacking-comments 1 - http://www.djangoproject.com/documentation/syndication_feeds/ -- David Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Blog engine
There a lot of other features missing in such solution: comments, spam protection, rss feeds and a lot more. I am searching for full featured blog engine. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
Hi, On 17 Jul 2007, at 10:15 am, Eratothene wrote: Please, recommend me some full featured blog engines developed in django. Though, I have found some posts in this user group about available blog engines, I still want to ask this question, as all posts are dated summer 2006. I don't see why you would want to use someone else's blog app, when blogs are quite personal to each person and so (relatively) trivial to write. Write a simple model for Entry with whatever fields you want (make sure it has publish date field), add something like django-tagging [0], use Django's generic date views [1] and you're pretty much there. Seems like such a good first project to write in Django as well 0 - http://code.google.com/p/django-tagging/ 1 - http://www.djangoproject.com/documentation/generic_views/#date- based-generic-views -- David Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Blog engine
Check out http://www.23excuses.com/2006/Jul/07/23-excuses-release-and-introduction/ too. Eric Lake On Nov 16, 7:49 am, Picio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You can also try to build It yourself following this, It's funny! ;) > > http://www2.lamptraining.com/screencast/1 > > Picio > > 2006/11/16, Guillermo Fernandez Castellanos > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > There is a few examples if you look in the mailing list: > >http://code.djangoproject.com/browser/djangoproject.com/django_websit... > >http://www.fallingbullets.com/blog/2006/nov/02/falling-bullets-source... > >http://www.rossp.org/blog/2006/may/15/django-magic-removal-upgrade/ > >http://www.guindilla.eu:8000/guindilla/trunk/guindilla/ > > And many others. > > > Hope it helps, > > > G > > > On 11/16/06, Mikhail Shevchuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hello friends, > > > > Could anyone tell me where can I get a blog engine written > > > in Django framework? > > > > -- > > > Generosity and perfection are your everlasting goals. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
You can also try to build It yourself following this, It's funny! ;) http://www2.lamptraining.com/screencast/1 Picio 2006/11/16, Guillermo Fernandez Castellanos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > There is a few examples if you look in the mailing list: > http://code.djangoproject.com/browser/djangoproject.com/django_website/apps/blog > http://www.fallingbullets.com/blog/2006/nov/02/falling-bullets-source-code-you-ninnies/ > http://www.rossp.org/blog/2006/may/15/django-magic-removal-upgrade/ > http://www.guindilla.eu:8000/guindilla/trunk/guindilla/ > And many others. > > Hope it helps, > > G > > On 11/16/06, Mikhail Shevchuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hello friends, > > > > Could anyone tell me where can I get a blog engine written > > in Django framework? > > > > -- > > Generosity and perfection are your everlasting goals. > > > > > > > > > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Blog engine
There is a few examples if you look in the mailing list: http://code.djangoproject.com/browser/djangoproject.com/django_website/apps/blog http://www.fallingbullets.com/blog/2006/nov/02/falling-bullets-source-code-you-ninnies/ http://www.rossp.org/blog/2006/may/15/django-magic-removal-upgrade/ http://www.guindilla.eu:8000/guindilla/trunk/guindilla/ And many others. Hope it helps, G On 11/16/06, Mikhail Shevchuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello friends, > > Could anyone tell me where can I get a blog engine written > in Django framework? > > -- > Generosity and perfection are your everlasting goals. > > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
