Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-17 Thread hunter
+1 on using a Dynamic Stylesheet Language for the Admin.

Would there only be one flavor? LESS or SCSS? Does it matter? Would
providing a means to implement either be necessary?





On Feb 16, 3:56 pm, Juan Pablo Martínez <jpm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The topic is: start using less (and bootstrap!)
> Please, no more offtopic.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Brendan Smith <
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> bren...@nationalpriorities.org> wrote:
> > i also regrettably give a +1 to github over bitbucket.   while I like
> > others would love to see a python based solution, especially django, give
> > github a run for it's money, i think github is years ahead of bitbucket in
> > terms of features and ease of use.
>
> > i also think git itself is going to remain the king of the source control
> > world for some time to come.
>
> > On Feb 16, 2012, at 2:49 PM, Victor Hooi wrote:
>
> > heya,
>
> > You know what, I have to say the same thing =).
>
> > BitBucket/Mercurial would seem like a better match.
>
> > Also, with the buy-out by Atlassian, they seem to be iterating more
> > frequently, in terms of features, and I would love to see a major Python
> > project, like Django, behind them.
>
> > Cheers,
> > Victor
>
> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 02:02, Stan <stanislas.gue...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> On Feb 9, 1:49 pm, zalew <zal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > We're going
> >> > > to solve that with our move to Git/GitHub, which will make it much
> >> > > easier for people to fork and much easier for core developers to
> >> > > integrate contributions.
>
> >> > a bit offtopic: why 
> >> > nothttp://bitbucket.org?similar<http://bitbucket.org/?similar>features, 
> >> > it's on
> >> > python/django and already popular in django community.
>
> >> +1 :-)
>
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> >> "Django developers" group.
> >> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> >> For more options, visit this group at
> >>http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Django developers" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>
> >  --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Django developers" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>
> --
> juanpex

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-16 Thread Juan Pablo Martínez
The topic is: start using less (and bootstrap!)
Please, no more offtopic.

Thanks

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Brendan Smith <
bren...@nationalpriorities.org> wrote:

> i also regrettably give a +1 to github over bitbucket.   while I like
> others would love to see a python based solution, especially django, give
> github a run for it's money, i think github is years ahead of bitbucket in
> terms of features and ease of use.
>
> i also think git itself is going to remain the king of the source control
> world for some time to come.
>
>
> On Feb 16, 2012, at 2:49 PM, Victor Hooi wrote:
>
> heya,
>
> You know what, I have to say the same thing =).
>
> BitBucket/Mercurial would seem like a better match.
>
> Also, with the buy-out by Atlassian, they seem to be iterating more
> frequently, in terms of features, and I would love to see a major Python
> project, like Django, behind them.
>
> Cheers,
> Victor
>
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 02:02, Stan <stanislas.gue...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Feb 9, 1:49 pm, zalew <zal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > We're going
>> > > to solve that with our move to Git/GitHub, which will make it much
>> > > easier for people to fork and much easier for core developers to
>> > > integrate contributions.
>> >
>> > a bit offtopic: why 
>> > nothttp://bitbucket.org?similar<http://bitbucket.org/?similar>features, 
>> > it's on
>> > python/django and already popular in django community.
>>
>> +1 :-)
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Django developers" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>>
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>



-- 
juanpex

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-16 Thread Brendan Smith
i also regrettably give a +1 to github over bitbucket.   while I like others 
would love to see a python based solution, especially django, give github a run 
for it's money, i think github is years ahead of bitbucket in terms of features 
and ease of use.

i also think git itself is going to remain the king of the source control world 
for some time to come.  


On Feb 16, 2012, at 2:49 PM, Victor Hooi wrote:

> heya,
> 
> You know what, I have to say the same thing =).
> 
> BitBucket/Mercurial would seem like a better match.
> 
> Also, with the buy-out by Atlassian, they seem to be iterating more 
> frequently, in terms of features, and I would love to see a major Python 
> project, like Django, behind them.
> 
> Cheers,
> Victor
> 
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 02:02, Stan  wrote:
> 
> 
> On Feb 9, 1:49 pm, zalew  wrote:
> > > We're going
> > > to solve that with our move to Git/GitHub, which will make it much
> > > easier for people to fork and much easier for core developers to
> > > integrate contributions.
> >
> > a bit offtopic: why nothttp://bitbucket.org?similar features, it's on
> > python/django and already popular in django community.
> 
> +1 :-)
> 
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-16 Thread Victor Hooi
heya,

You know what, I have to say the same thing =).

BitBucket/Mercurial would seem like a better match.

Also, with the buy-out by Atlassian, they seem to be iterating more
frequently, in terms of features, and I would love to see a major Python
project, like Django, behind them.

Cheers,
Victor

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 02:02, Stan  wrote:

>
>
> On Feb 9, 1:49 pm, zalew  wrote:
> > > We're going
> > > to solve that with our move to Git/GitHub, which will make it much
> > > easier for people to fork and much easier for core developers to
> > > integrate contributions.
> >
> > a bit offtopic: why nothttp://bitbucket.org?similar features, it's on
> > python/django and already popular in django community.
>
> +1 :-)
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-16 Thread Stan


On Feb 9, 1:49 pm, zalew  wrote:
> > We're going
> > to solve that with our move to Git/GitHub, which will make it much
> > easier for people to fork and much easier for core developers to
> > integrate contributions.
>
> a bit offtopic: why nothttp://bitbucket.org?similar features, it's on
> python/django and already popular in django community.

+1 :-)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-16 Thread Victor Hooi
heya,

Are you willing to share your Bootstrap-themed admin, so others can see 
what it's about, and contribute?

Cheers,
Victor

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/-/l9Gj5T75k4oJ.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-15 Thread is_null
Testifying:

0) migrating the current admin theme to bootstrap is easy (3-4 hours
of template hacking)
1) the result is great (bye bye 90's theme)
2) it requires minor work in many admin template
3) doesn't force to use less at all
4) found two things that sucks during my journey which are
definitively worth some love: 0) admindoc templates follow worst
practice and 1) impossible to make 2 admin sites with different
templates and use django-mobileadmin in the other site

Using a CSS framework would be a step forward comparable to the use of
a JS framework. Think of the reasons you decided to use jQuery in the
admin: it's the same for bootstrap.

If you like the vintage style and want Django admin to be behind the
other projects out there then my advice is: don't integrate bootstrap
nor any sexy CSS framework.

Cheers from Spain
(<3 our bootstrap themed admin)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-14 Thread Buddy Lindsey

There seems to be 2 key issues, as mentioned before:

1. Admin isn't moving forward fast enough.
2. It is hard to contribute.

It seems that there is enough resistance to not moving Admin out that it 
seems like it would be a
bad idea if it was moved. However, I am sure many contributions haven't 
been submitted because

people aren't sure what they can do for admin.

There seems to be a lot of change right now and am partial to the wait 
and see approach. With the
move to github I can forsee many many more contributions taking place 
than there are now, simply
because it is easier to do so. I personally saw it as very daunting to 
contribute until I learned I could
submit a pull request on github. I chose to test the waters with a 
simple documentation pull request,

but it was super simple in the end.

Maybe wait 6 months and see what evolves out of the move to github 
before  taking a scalpel to the
admin and trying to break it up? I mean sometime inaction _is_ an actual 
solution while letting dust

settle on multiple things.

Like Jonathan I am new here so feel free to ignore me if you want.

Thanks,
Buddy


On 2/14/12 9:02 PM, Juan Pablo Martínez wrote:

+1 to separate django and admin o other contrib app.
-0 to mantain another/alternative admin on contrib

It is understandable at first that was maintained at par for order and 
security in the project itself.


But today, after Django 1.3.1 I think it's time to review the 
situation of contrib.


With teams in each Django contrib application would be a 
little more flexible.


That is my humble opinion :)

Regards,

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Jonathan Paugh > wrote:


There's a big rift here between what people want to do with admin and
what people want to do with django itself. To summarize: the admin
should be amazing by itself and chock full of features, while django
should be empowering without getting in the way.

I've seen a lot of good ideas for admin rejected recently because they
couldn't fit into Django's overall vision. I don't think there is any
way to resolve this rift: it will persist. Django and admin should be
developed separately, likely by separate teams. They could still
live in
the same codebase, with an "subofficial" admin fork. Then, the
official
django repo could pull in changes according to some suitable policy.

However, maintaining it as a separate project wouldn't hurt, either:
In address to Anssi's concerns: conteaching pip is as easy as `pip
install django-admin`, and the two projects could be tarball-ed
together
somehow. (Could it be that hard to teach setup.py to install another
package from a subdir? Or to tar up them separately?) (And what is
virtualenv? Do I need it to install admin? Let's address that in a
separate tutorial, with a link and a notation.)

Peace,
Jonathan

P.S. I'm fairly new here (~1 month), and my perspective is
proportionally skewed.

On 02/03/2012 02:07 PM, Ryan D Hiebert wrote:
> I think that Django's admin app is a killer feature for two main
reasons:
> 1. It is automatically installed, and integrated into the tutorial.
> 2. It is used all over in third-party apps, because they can
expect it to be there.
>
> While I appreciate that there may be differences in core vs
admin that may slow down development of the admin, I'm wary of
removing it from the django install, thinking that it might hurt
reason 2, even if it is integrated in the tuturial, and possibly
even installed automatically.
>
> Although as far as the automatic install goes, I'm not sure how
that would work. Would it be a dependency? That doesn't make sense.
>
> On Feb 3, 2012, at 6:21 AM, Max Thayer wrote:
>
>> The point about admin's appeal to new people is important, but
externalizing it and keeping new people from ever seeing it are
very different. Consider: admin isn't even enabled by default. You
have to follow the tutorial on how to enable it. If admin weren't
included in Django proper, we could just change the tutorial to
"Apps are awesome; here's how to download and install one written
by someone else." New users could meet pip sooner, and otherwise
understand how to integrate with the broader python/django
community's various creations.
>>
>> Actually, a friend of mine and I have been plotting out
externalizing various parts of contrib, like admin and auth. Are
any groups currently pursuing those goals as well?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Max
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Brendan Smith
> wrote:
>> I give +1 to the idea of separating out the admin and letting
people fork and modify to their hearts content
>>
>> I also still give my +1 to having it 

Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-14 Thread Juan Pablo Martínez
+1 to separate django and admin o other contrib app.
-0 to mantain another/alternative admin on contrib

It is understandable at first that was maintained at par for order and
security in the project itself.

But today, after Django 1.3.1 I think it's time to review the situation
of contrib.

With teams in each Django contrib application would be a
little more flexible.

That is my humble opinion :)

Regards,

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Jonathan Paugh  wrote:

> There's a big rift here between what people want to do with admin and
> what people want to do with django itself. To summarize: the admin
> should be amazing by itself and chock full of features, while django
> should be empowering without getting in the way.
>
> I've seen a lot of good ideas for admin rejected recently because they
> couldn't fit into Django's overall vision. I don't think there is any
> way to resolve this rift: it will persist. Django and admin should be
> developed separately, likely by separate teams. They could still live in
> the same codebase, with an "subofficial" admin fork. Then, the official
> django repo could pull in changes according to some suitable policy.
>
> However, maintaining it as a separate project wouldn't hurt, either:
> In address to Anssi's concerns: conteaching pip is as easy as `pip
> install django-admin`, and the two projects could be tarball-ed together
> somehow. (Could it be that hard to teach setup.py to install another
> package from a subdir? Or to tar up them separately?) (And what is
> virtualenv? Do I need it to install admin? Let's address that in a
> separate tutorial, with a link and a notation.)
>
> Peace,
> Jonathan
>
> P.S. I'm fairly new here (~1 month), and my perspective is
> proportionally skewed.
>
> On 02/03/2012 02:07 PM, Ryan D Hiebert wrote:
> > I think that Django's admin app is a killer feature for two main reasons:
> > 1. It is automatically installed, and integrated into the tutorial.
> > 2. It is used all over in third-party apps, because they can expect it
> to be there.
> >
> > While I appreciate that there may be differences in core vs admin that
> may slow down development of the admin, I'm wary of removing it from the
> django install, thinking that it might hurt reason 2, even if it is
> integrated in the tuturial, and possibly even installed automatically.
> >
> > Although as far as the automatic install goes, I'm not sure how that
> would work. Would it be a dependency? That doesn't make sense.
> >
> > On Feb 3, 2012, at 6:21 AM, Max Thayer wrote:
> >
> >> The point about admin's appeal to new people is important, but
> externalizing it and keeping new people from ever seeing it are very
> different. Consider: admin isn't even enabled by default. You have to
> follow the tutorial on how to enable it. If admin weren't included in
> Django proper, we could just change the tutorial to "Apps are awesome;
> here's how to download and install one written by someone else." New users
> could meet pip sooner, and otherwise understand how to integrate with the
> broader python/django community's various creations.
> >>
> >> Actually, a friend of mine and I have been plotting out externalizing
> various parts of contrib, like admin and auth. Are any groups currently
> pursuing those goals as well?
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Max
> >>
> >> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Brendan Smith <
> bren...@nationalpriorities.org> wrote:
> >> I give +1 to the idea of separating out the admin and letting people
> fork and modify to their hearts content
> >>
> >> I also still give my +1 to having it utilize less, but I am also
> cautious like others about prescribing bootstrap specifically , especially
> the JS since as others have pointed out is somewhat unstable right now and
> not very easy to use at times (took me a long time to figure out modals)
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >> On Feb 3, 2012, at 1:25 AM, Harris Lapiroff 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The Django admin is a major—if not *the* major—selling point to
> >>> budding developers. I worry that externalizing it (hence making it a
> >>> *separate* piece of software that needs to be discovered and
> >>> installed, which seems simple but can be quite a challenge to new
> >>> coders) might take away Django's non-expert appeal. When I started
> >>> using Django, I knew no python. The only reason I was able to make
> >>> that work was because of the Django admin. If the admin gets kicked
> >>> out, I think it should be made *very* obvious where to find one.
> >>>
> >>> I'd be wary of putting them in core but I think using Bootstrap and
> >>> Less for a new admin (whether internal or external) would make its
> >>> development much faster. Dependencies should not be a problem. I think
> >>> jQuery is a pretty apt analogy here. You probably won't write much
> >>> javascript for the Django admin without learning jQuery. You can if
> >>> you want to. But most people don't need or want to 

Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-14 Thread Jonathan Paugh
There's a big rift here between what people want to do with admin and
what people want to do with django itself. To summarize: the admin
should be amazing by itself and chock full of features, while django
should be empowering without getting in the way.

I've seen a lot of good ideas for admin rejected recently because they
couldn't fit into Django's overall vision. I don't think there is any
way to resolve this rift: it will persist. Django and admin should be
developed separately, likely by separate teams. They could still live in
the same codebase, with an "subofficial" admin fork. Then, the official
django repo could pull in changes according to some suitable policy.

However, maintaining it as a separate project wouldn't hurt, either:
In address to Anssi's concerns: conteaching pip is as easy as `pip
install django-admin`, and the two projects could be tarball-ed together
somehow. (Could it be that hard to teach setup.py to install another
package from a subdir? Or to tar up them separately?) (And what is
virtualenv? Do I need it to install admin? Let's address that in a
separate tutorial, with a link and a notation.)

Peace,
Jonathan

P.S. I'm fairly new here (~1 month), and my perspective is
proportionally skewed.

On 02/03/2012 02:07 PM, Ryan D Hiebert wrote:
> I think that Django's admin app is a killer feature for two main reasons:
> 1. It is automatically installed, and integrated into the tutorial.
> 2. It is used all over in third-party apps, because they can expect it to be 
> there.
> 
> While I appreciate that there may be differences in core vs admin that may 
> slow down development of the admin, I'm wary of removing it from the django 
> install, thinking that it might hurt reason 2, even if it is integrated in 
> the tuturial, and possibly even installed automatically.
> 
> Although as far as the automatic install goes, I'm not sure how that would 
> work. Would it be a dependency? That doesn't make sense.
> 
> On Feb 3, 2012, at 6:21 AM, Max Thayer wrote:
> 
>> The point about admin's appeal to new people is important, but externalizing 
>> it and keeping new people from ever seeing it are very different. Consider: 
>> admin isn't even enabled by default. You have to follow the tutorial on how 
>> to enable it. If admin weren't included in Django proper, we could just 
>> change the tutorial to "Apps are awesome; here's how to download and install 
>> one written by someone else." New users could meet pip sooner, and otherwise 
>> understand how to integrate with the broader python/django community's 
>> various creations.
>>
>> Actually, a friend of mine and I have been plotting out externalizing 
>> various parts of contrib, like admin and auth. Are any groups currently 
>> pursuing those goals as well?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Max
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Brendan Smith 
>>  wrote:
>> I give +1 to the idea of separating out the admin and letting people fork 
>> and modify to their hearts content
>>
>> I also still give my +1 to having it utilize less, but I am also cautious 
>> like others about prescribing bootstrap specifically , especially the JS 
>> since as others have pointed out is somewhat unstable right now and not very 
>> easy to use at times (took me a long time to figure out modals)
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Feb 3, 2012, at 1:25 AM, Harris Lapiroff  wrote:
>>
>>> The Django admin is a major—if not *the* major—selling point to
>>> budding developers. I worry that externalizing it (hence making it a
>>> *separate* piece of software that needs to be discovered and
>>> installed, which seems simple but can be quite a challenge to new
>>> coders) might take away Django's non-expert appeal. When I started
>>> using Django, I knew no python. The only reason I was able to make
>>> that work was because of the Django admin. If the admin gets kicked
>>> out, I think it should be made *very* obvious where to find one.
>>>
>>> I'd be wary of putting them in core but I think using Bootstrap and
>>> Less for a new admin (whether internal or external) would make its
>>> development much faster. Dependencies should not be a problem. I think
>>> jQuery is a pretty apt analogy here. You probably won't write much
>>> javascript for the Django admin without learning jQuery. You can if
>>> you want to. But most people don't need or want to write javascript
>>> for the Django admin anyway. I think a framework like Bootstrap it
>>> would actually simplify adding new features. It provides so many CSS
>>> classes that there's a pretty good chance your feature wouldn't
>>> require you to write even a line of CSS. I was able to convert an
>>> unstyled app that I've been working on to functionally using Bootstrap
>>> in just about an hour after starting to learn it.
>>>
>>> That having been said, I'd still be cautious with Bootstrap. It is a
>>> young piece of software that is incredibly impressive and mind-
>>> 

Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-09 Thread zalew


> We're going
> to solve that with our move to Git/GitHub, which will make it much
> easier for people to fork and much easier for core developers to
> integrate contributions.


a bit offtopic: why not http://bitbucket.org? similar features, it's on 
python/django and already popular in django community.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/-/uWdwl_1-_qIJ.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-04 Thread Mateusz Marzantowicz
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Ric  wrote:

> no no, my point is not to remove admin, you misunderstood me...
>
> what i'm talking about is the extend the current admin version, with a
> theme framework.
>
> the theme framework got a default theme, that is the current admin
> theme, but then developers can add their own theme.
>
>
now making a theme for django is an hack, and not an hook, because
> some javascript are hard coded inside django admin.
>

So there is a need for code cleanup. I haven't checked if it's possible yet
(no need so far), but I think such split of JS and Python code is possible.


> i'm thinking about jquery, django use 1.4, i need 1.7 for my
> javascript, and i've done a terrbile hack to remove js from admin.
>

The solution is to upgrade jQuery in Django admin. More effort is to be
taken to include the newest jQuery with each Django release. It looks, it
is simpler then themes. I'm using completely different jQuery version in my
sites then what is included in Django admin and I have no problem with
this. I don't need to touch anything in Django admin UI (like about 90% of
regular django users).


>
> what i'm talking about is creating a single place in django to
> register stylesheet and javascripts, and then inject them in every
> context with an optional context processor.
>


Currently there is django-sekizai used e.g. by django-cms project.
Introduction of another media handling framework would complicate things.
To be honest I hate using this framework because it makes a lot of mess in
my templates. After all I have my CSS and JavaScript placed in static files
served from different web server. Using jQuery it is easy to hook to HTML
to fire some js function etc. and it should be equally easy to do it with
Django admin.


>
> using a request.media attr, would allow admin to add on the fly style
> and js for horizontal filters and fancy widget.
>
> then for developers would be more simple to create and mantain a
> separete bootstrap theme.
>


---
Mateusz Marzantowicz

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-04 Thread Ric
no no, my point is not to remove admin, you misunderstood me...

what i'm talking about is the extend the current admin version, with a
theme framework.

the theme framework got a default theme, that is the current admin
theme, but then developers can add their own theme.

now making a theme for django is an hack, and not an hook, because
some javascript are hard coded inside django admin.

i'm thinking about jquery, django use 1.4, i need 1.7 for my
javascript, and i've done a terrbile hack to remove js from admin.

what i'm talking about is creating a single place in django to
register stylesheet and javascripts, and then inject them in every
context with an optional context processor.

using a request.media attr, would allow admin to add on the fly style
and js for horizontal filters and fancy widget.

then for developers would be more simple to create and mantain a
separete bootstrap theme.


On 4 Feb, 11:16, Anssi Kääriäinen  wrote:
> On Feb 4, 11:26 am, "Adam \"Cezar\" Jenkins" 
> wrote:
>
> > In this thread. There is a lot of mistaking of an app being installed with
> > Django vs. an app being in the same code repo as Django.
>
> Wouldn't this mean there are all the same dependencies for default
> install? What about backwards compatibility, can Django include
> something by default which has its own versioning policy? How does
> this even work with regards to tarball downloads, which is probably
> still the most common way to install Django in the new users category.
> That happens to be the category who are most hit by removal of Django
> from contrib.
>
> If this would be done, it would mean a radical sift in the way Django
> is distributed. Tutorial step 3 should be changed from talking about
> the admin to talking about how to use PIP, virtualenv and where to
> find nice packages. Using django-admin2 as an example. Maybe this
> could work and would actually benefit Django development. But this is
> a radical change from "download this tarball and off you go, batteries
> included, backwards compatibility for 2 releases guaranteed"
> philosophy.
>
>  - Anssi

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-04 Thread Anssi Kääriäinen
On Feb 4, 11:26 am, "Adam \"Cezar\" Jenkins" 
wrote:
> In this thread. There is a lot of mistaking of an app being installed with
> Django vs. an app being in the same code repo as Django.

Wouldn't this mean there are all the same dependencies for default
install? What about backwards compatibility, can Django include
something by default which has its own versioning policy? How does
this even work with regards to tarball downloads, which is probably
still the most common way to install Django in the new users category.
That happens to be the category who are most hit by removal of Django
from contrib.

If this would be done, it would mean a radical sift in the way Django
is distributed. Tutorial step 3 should be changed from talking about
the admin to talking about how to use PIP, virtualenv and where to
find nice packages. Using django-admin2 as an example. Maybe this
could work and would actually benefit Django development. But this is
a radical change from "download this tarball and off you go, batteries
included, backwards compatibility for 2 releases guaranteed"
philosophy.

 - Anssi

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-04 Thread Adam "Cezar" Jenkins
In this thread. There is a lot of mistaking of an app being installed with
Django vs. an app being in the same code repo as Django.

Don't worry people. I don't think anyone is seriously considering throwing
away the admin.

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Joe & Anne Tennies wrote:

> I'll throw in my 2 cents.
>
> Please, please do not remove auth or admin. They really are the selling
> point and reason to use Django over something else. That being stated, you
> do not have to keep auth or admin in their current forms. I have no problem
> whatsoever with making them more of an API than an implementation.
>
> Figure out the signals an auth backend should have and the basic things
> expected to be implemented. For instance, a User should have a user_id,
> human-readable name (optional), email address (optional), profile?,
> permissions, auth_groups, and backend authenticated with (I'm sure there
> may be others that should be here). I think the current signals are
> probably fine. Also needed would be some sort of "backend plugin loader"
> (like the one for the ORM allowing MySQL, Postgres, etc.) Then include a
> very basic implementation that just does username/password authentication
> with the database as an app that can be used. (Others can maintain an open
> id, facebook, etc. outside the core of Django, but the standard is there.)
> PS: Something like Twisted.cred may a good reference for such an abstract
> thing.
>
> Ditto for the admin. So what if it's not ajax or less, just make a simple
> one that works and let others extend/reimplement to get a fancy version.
>
> This to me is congruent with the answer I had heard thrown around for
> South. Don't include South in Django, but include a base specification that
> South and nashvegas can agree to. (required parts needed in the ORM and
> schema revision tracking, etc.) Then include a simple implementation that
> can migrate databases via some script but not autodetect changes.
>
>
> Basically, I see a big need for Django to start providing specifications
> to how things
> --
> Joe & Anne Tennies
> tenn...@gmail.com
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-03 Thread Joe & Anne Tennies
I'll throw in my 2 cents.

Please, please do not remove auth or admin. They really are the selling
point and reason to use Django over something else. That being stated, you
do not have to keep auth or admin in their current forms. I have no problem
whatsoever with making them more of an API than an implementation.

Figure out the signals an auth backend should have and the basic things
expected to be implemented. For instance, a User should have a user_id,
human-readable name (optional), email address (optional), profile?,
permissions, auth_groups, and backend authenticated with (I'm sure there
may be others that should be here). I think the current signals are
probably fine. Also needed would be some sort of "backend plugin loader"
(like the one for the ORM allowing MySQL, Postgres, etc.) Then include a
very basic implementation that just does username/password authentication
with the database as an app that can be used. (Others can maintain an open
id, facebook, etc. outside the core of Django, but the standard is there.)
PS: Something like Twisted.cred may a good reference for such an abstract
thing.

Ditto for the admin. So what if it's not ajax or less, just make a simple
one that works and let others extend/reimplement to get a fancy version.

This to me is congruent with the answer I had heard thrown around for
South. Don't include South in Django, but include a base specification that
South and nashvegas can agree to. (required parts needed in the ORM and
schema revision tracking, etc.) Then include a simple implementation that
can migrate databases via some script but not autodetect changes.


Basically, I see a big need for Django to start providing specifications to
how things
-- 
Joe & Anne Tennies
tenn...@gmail.com

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-03 Thread Anssi Kääriäinen
Just adding my point of view to this thread. I haven't even heard of
Bootstrap before. I know less (and other similar systems) but haven't
ever used them. I do need to do frontend work. I am not good at all in
it, and I do not enjoy it. But I need to do it.

Now, if Admin would begin using less and bootstrap, that would be a
problem for me. I would need to learn those tools to effectively
customize the Admin. While CSS and HTML can be expected to be known, I
don't think you can expect people to know less or bootstrap.

My viewpoint (in general, not just related to admin) is that Django
should contain as much hooks as possible and no, or only simple,
implementations. It might be possible to design the Admin in such a
way that you could completely overhaul how it looks and maybe even
behaves by subclassing. So, external projects could rely that there is
an Admin application, and that it has a common API. External projects
could customize it. I don't know the admin well, and I really don't
know the latest tools in the frontend development world. So, maybe
what I just said is impossible to do in practice.

I do feel that there needs to be some data editing application
inbuilt. Maybe admin has just become too complex. Make it simpler,
while allowing external projects to extend it (as said, if at all
possible).

About Github and forking. This is all good and well, but customize-by-
forking tends to have the problem that internal parts become de-facto
public. Something like the situation with model._meta. I really feel
that if Django encourages forking, then there must be strong consensus
that the non-public parts of Django really are non-public. I am
worried that otherwise changing anything in Django will become harder
than it needs to be. For example, if the ORM internals were to be
refactored, but this resulted in breaking django-nonrel and maybe
other projects like that, would that be OK?

 - Anssi

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-03 Thread Ric
a less compiler is needed to make developers add custom variables to
match color scheme they like.

i prefeer using an existing framework, a lot of work less to do, no
docs to make, just a link.
bootstrap it's fantastic, it's well done and is flexible.

django should use a base style, already compiled for backward
compatibility.

i would make a theme framework, something like django.contrib.themes,
a css/js/less framework to customize every view and the admin.

imagine a subclass of django.forms.Media

class MediaMiddleware(object):

def process_exception(self, request, e):
request.media = GlobalMedia()

user can add css doing

>>> request.media.add_css(

django admin could do this to add media it gets from admin forms doing

request.media += self.media + adminForm.media

and then push media in context


we could create a GlobalMediaContextProcessor, it import an instance
of global_media and put it in every template with a namespace of
"global_media".

def base(request):

return {
'media':request.media,
}

and than in template use

{{ media.css }}

now, with this kind of hook, user can choose, site wide, what media
use.
with a context_processor, a media class is injected in every template,
and views can add js and css on the fly, pushing them over
request.media

with some less rule, admin template could be reskinned, and user can
select a different type of themes

THEME_CLASS = "django.contrib.themes.DefaultTheme"

then wu could add a "django.contrib.themes.Bootstrap"

a globalmedia class that host less definition for a bootstrap theme.

with an app like this users could choose if continue to use default
theme or switch to a bootstrap template, to develop faster a front-end
interface.

no backward compatibility issues, just one more possibility for
developers.


what views can do is to
On 3 Feb, 20:07, Ryan D Hiebert  wrote:
> I think that Django's admin app is a killer feature for two main reasons:
> 1. It is automatically installed, and integrated into the tutorial.
> 2. It is used all over in third-party apps, because they can expect it to be 
> there.
>
> While I appreciate that there may be differences in core vs admin that may 
> slow down development of the admin, I'm wary of removing it from the django 
> install, thinking that it might hurt reason 2, even if it is integrated in 
> the tuturial, and possibly even installed automatically.
>
> Although as far as the automatic install goes, I'm not sure how that would 
> work. Would it be a dependency? That doesn't make sense.
>
> On Feb 3, 2012, at 6:21 AM, Max Thayer wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > The point about admin's appeal to new people is important, but 
> > externalizing it and keeping new people from ever seeing it are very 
> > different. Consider: admin isn't even enabled by default. You have to 
> > follow the tutorial on how to enable it. If admin weren't included in 
> > Django proper, we could just change the tutorial to "Apps are awesome; 
> > here's how to download and install one written by someone else." New users 
> > could meet pip sooner, and otherwise understand how to integrate with the 
> > broader python/django community's various creations.
>
> > Actually, a friend of mine and I have been plotting out externalizing 
> > various parts of contrib, like admin and auth. Are any groups currently 
> > pursuing those goals as well?
>
> > Best regards,
> > Max
>
> > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Brendan Smith 
> >  wrote:
> > I give +1 to the idea of separating out the admin and letting people fork 
> > and modify to their hearts content
>
> > I also still give my +1 to having it utilize less, but I am also cautious 
> > like others about prescribing bootstrap specifically , especially the JS 
> > since as others have pointed out is somewhat unstable right now and not 
> > very easy to use at times (took me a long time to figure out modals)
>
> > Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Feb 3, 2012, at 1:25 AM, Harris Lapiroff  
> > wrote:
>
> > > The Django admin is a major—if not *the* major—selling point to
> > > budding developers. I worry that externalizing it (hence making it a
> > > *separate* piece of software that needs to be discovered and
> > > installed, which seems simple but can be quite a challenge to new
> > > coders) might take away Django's non-expert appeal. When I started
> > > using Django, I knew no python. The only reason I was able to make
> > > that work was because of the Django admin. If the admin gets kicked
> > > out, I think it should be made *very* obvious where to find one.
>
> > > I'd be wary of putting them in core but I think using Bootstrap and
> > > Less for a new admin (whether internal or external) would make its
> > > development much faster. Dependencies should not be a problem. I think
> > > jQuery is a pretty apt analogy here. You probably won't write much
> > > javascript for the Django admin without 

Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-03 Thread Ryan D Hiebert
I think that Django's admin app is a killer feature for two main reasons:
1. It is automatically installed, and integrated into the tutorial.
2. It is used all over in third-party apps, because they can expect it to be 
there.

While I appreciate that there may be differences in core vs admin that may slow 
down development of the admin, I'm wary of removing it from the django install, 
thinking that it might hurt reason 2, even if it is integrated in the tuturial, 
and possibly even installed automatically.

Although as far as the automatic install goes, I'm not sure how that would 
work. Would it be a dependency? That doesn't make sense.

On Feb 3, 2012, at 6:21 AM, Max Thayer wrote:

> The point about admin's appeal to new people is important, but externalizing 
> it and keeping new people from ever seeing it are very different. Consider: 
> admin isn't even enabled by default. You have to follow the tutorial on how 
> to enable it. If admin weren't included in Django proper, we could just 
> change the tutorial to "Apps are awesome; here's how to download and install 
> one written by someone else." New users could meet pip sooner, and otherwise 
> understand how to integrate with the broader python/django community's 
> various creations.
> 
> Actually, a friend of mine and I have been plotting out externalizing various 
> parts of contrib, like admin and auth. Are any groups currently pursuing 
> those goals as well?
> 
> Best regards,
> Max
> 
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Brendan Smith 
>  wrote:
> I give +1 to the idea of separating out the admin and letting people fork and 
> modify to their hearts content
> 
> I also still give my +1 to having it utilize less, but I am also cautious 
> like others about prescribing bootstrap specifically , especially the JS 
> since as others have pointed out is somewhat unstable right now and not very 
> easy to use at times (took me a long time to figure out modals)
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Feb 3, 2012, at 1:25 AM, Harris Lapiroff  wrote:
> 
> > The Django admin is a major—if not *the* major—selling point to
> > budding developers. I worry that externalizing it (hence making it a
> > *separate* piece of software that needs to be discovered and
> > installed, which seems simple but can be quite a challenge to new
> > coders) might take away Django's non-expert appeal. When I started
> > using Django, I knew no python. The only reason I was able to make
> > that work was because of the Django admin. If the admin gets kicked
> > out, I think it should be made *very* obvious where to find one.
> >
> > I'd be wary of putting them in core but I think using Bootstrap and
> > Less for a new admin (whether internal or external) would make its
> > development much faster. Dependencies should not be a problem. I think
> > jQuery is a pretty apt analogy here. You probably won't write much
> > javascript for the Django admin without learning jQuery. You can if
> > you want to. But most people don't need or want to write javascript
> > for the Django admin anyway. I think a framework like Bootstrap it
> > would actually simplify adding new features. It provides so many CSS
> > classes that there's a pretty good chance your feature wouldn't
> > require you to write even a line of CSS. I was able to convert an
> > unstyled app that I've been working on to functionally using Bootstrap
> > in just about an hour after starting to learn it.
> >
> > That having been said, I'd still be cautious with Bootstrap. It is a
> > young piece of software that is incredibly impressive and mind-
> > bogglingly easy to use, but obviously still in flux.
> >
> > On Feb 2, 5:38 pm, Sean Brant  wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Alex Gaynor  wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Adrian Holovaty  
> >>> wrote:
> >>
>  On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Sean Brant  wrote:
> > Is this up somewhere public? I've been fighting the urge to do this as
> > well. Using django-compressor with less on Heroku is a non-starter
> > since you can't install node. Having this as a Python module would be
> > handy.
> >>
>  Not yet, alas, but hopefully soon.
> >>
>  Adrian
> >>
>  --
>  You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>  "Django developers" group.
>  To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
>  To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>  django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>  For more options, visit this group at
>  http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
> >>
> >>> Perhaps this is too far in the future looking.  But at a certain point the
> >>> admin must become a separate project.  One of the major goals of
> >>> newforms-admin ('lo those years ago) was to demote the admin from 

Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-03 Thread Brendan Smith
I had not heard about the move to GitHub but I am +10 on that move. 


On Feb 3, 2012, at 11:20 AM, Adrian Holovaty wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 12:25 AM, Harris Lapiroff
>  wrote:
>> The Django admin is a major—if not *the* major—selling point to
>> budding developers. I worry that externalizing it (hence making it a
>> *separate* piece of software that needs to be discovered and
>> installed, which seems simple but can be quite a challenge to new
>> coders) might take away Django's non-expert appeal. When I started
>> using Django, I knew no python. The only reason I was able to make
>> that work was because of the Django admin. If the admin gets kicked
>> out, I think it should be made *very* obvious where to find one.
> 
> I agree with this sentiment. I think separating the admin into a
> standalone app would be a step backward, at least at this point.
> 
> It strikes me that "the Django admin is hard for people to fork and
> modify" is a symptom of something else, not a problem in itself. The
> bigger problem is that our current development infrastructure
> (Subversion/Trac) doesn't allow for easy forking workflow. We're going
> to solve that with our move to Git/GitHub, which will make it much
> easier for people to fork and much easier for core developers to
> integrate contributions.
> 
> Before making any final judgment on separating the admin, we should
> see how our community's move to GitHub goes. I'm suspecting the pain
> points around forking will vanish at that point.
> 
> P.S. In case you haven't heard about the GitHub move, here's a blog
> post you should read: http://www.holovaty.com/writing/back-to-django/
> ETA is sometime soon after we launch 1.4.
> 
> Adrian
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
> 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-03 Thread Max Thayer
The point about admin's appeal to new people is important, but
externalizing it and keeping new people from ever seeing it are very
different. Consider: admin isn't even enabled by default. You have to
follow the tutorial on how to enable it. If admin weren't included in
Django proper, we could just change the tutorial to "Apps are awesome;
here's how to download and install one written by someone else." New users
could meet pip sooner, and otherwise understand how to integrate with the
broader python/django community's various creations.

Actually, a friend of mine and I have been plotting out externalizing
various parts of contrib, like admin and auth. Are any groups currently
pursuing those goals as well?

Best regards,
Max

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Brendan Smith <
bren...@nationalpriorities.org> wrote:

> I give +1 to the idea of separating out the admin and letting people fork
> and modify to their hearts content
>
> I also still give my +1 to having it utilize less, but I am also cautious
> like others about prescribing bootstrap specifically , especially the JS
> since as others have pointed out is somewhat unstable right now and not
> very easy to use at times (took me a long time to figure out modals)
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 3, 2012, at 1:25 AM, Harris Lapiroff 
> wrote:
>
> > The Django admin is a major—if not *the* major—selling point to
> > budding developers. I worry that externalizing it (hence making it a
> > *separate* piece of software that needs to be discovered and
> > installed, which seems simple but can be quite a challenge to new
> > coders) might take away Django's non-expert appeal. When I started
> > using Django, I knew no python. The only reason I was able to make
> > that work was because of the Django admin. If the admin gets kicked
> > out, I think it should be made *very* obvious where to find one.
> >
> > I'd be wary of putting them in core but I think using Bootstrap and
> > Less for a new admin (whether internal or external) would make its
> > development much faster. Dependencies should not be a problem. I think
> > jQuery is a pretty apt analogy here. You probably won't write much
> > javascript for the Django admin without learning jQuery. You can if
> > you want to. But most people don't need or want to write javascript
> > for the Django admin anyway. I think a framework like Bootstrap it
> > would actually simplify adding new features. It provides so many CSS
> > classes that there's a pretty good chance your feature wouldn't
> > require you to write even a line of CSS. I was able to convert an
> > unstyled app that I've been working on to functionally using Bootstrap
> > in just about an hour after starting to learn it.
> >
> > That having been said, I'd still be cautious with Bootstrap. It is a
> > young piece of software that is incredibly impressive and mind-
> > bogglingly easy to use, but obviously still in flux.
> >
> > On Feb 2, 5:38 pm, Sean Brant  wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Alex Gaynor 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Adrian Holovaty 
> wrote:
> >>
>  On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Sean Brant 
> wrote:
> > Is this up somewhere public? I've been fighting the urge to do this
> as
> > well. Using django-compressor with less on Heroku is a non-starter
> > since you can't install node. Having this as a Python module would be
> > handy.
> >>
>  Not yet, alas, but hopefully soon.
> >>
>  Adrian
> >>
>  --
>  You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
>  "Django developers" group.
>  To post to this group, send email to
> django-developers@googlegroups.com.
>  To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>  django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>  For more options, visit this group at
>  http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
> >>
> >>> Perhaps this is too far in the future looking.  But at a certain point
> the
> >>> admin must become a separate project.  One of the major goals of
> >>> newforms-admin ('lo those years ago) was to demote the admin from
> special
> >>> status, with hooks inside core left and right, to "just an app".  Let's
> >>> carry that to the logical conclusion: just an app *outside of Django*.
> >>
> >>> That gives the maintainers the freedom to reinvent it, and use tools
> like
> >>> less or bootstrap without it needing to be an issue of policy for all
> of
> >>> Django.  Because when I first read saw this thread my thought was,
> "Hmm,
> >>> what unholy mess of requirements am I going to need if I want to just
> run
> >>> the test suite.  Will I still be able to write new features in forms
> without
> >>> needing to learn what the hell less or compass is?".  Several years
> ago, I
> >>> opposed using jQuery in the admin, on the principle that Django 

Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-03 Thread Adrian Holovaty
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 12:25 AM, Harris Lapiroff
 wrote:
> The Django admin is a major—if not *the* major—selling point to
> budding developers. I worry that externalizing it (hence making it a
> *separate* piece of software that needs to be discovered and
> installed, which seems simple but can be quite a challenge to new
> coders) might take away Django's non-expert appeal. When I started
> using Django, I knew no python. The only reason I was able to make
> that work was because of the Django admin. If the admin gets kicked
> out, I think it should be made *very* obvious where to find one.

I agree with this sentiment. I think separating the admin into a
standalone app would be a step backward, at least at this point.

It strikes me that "the Django admin is hard for people to fork and
modify" is a symptom of something else, not a problem in itself. The
bigger problem is that our current development infrastructure
(Subversion/Trac) doesn't allow for easy forking workflow. We're going
to solve that with our move to Git/GitHub, which will make it much
easier for people to fork and much easier for core developers to
integrate contributions.

Before making any final judgment on separating the admin, we should
see how our community's move to GitHub goes. I'm suspecting the pain
points around forking will vanish at that point.

P.S. In case you haven't heard about the GitHub move, here's a blog
post you should read: http://www.holovaty.com/writing/back-to-django/
ETA is sometime soon after we launch 1.4.

Adrian

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-03 Thread Adam "Cezar" Jenkins
I heard this before from others. When someone installs Django from pypi it
can install things like the admin without admin being inside the Django
codebase. This is the simplest solution in my opinion.

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 12:25 AM, Harris Lapiroff
wrote:

> The Django admin is a major—if not *the* major—selling point to
> budding developers. I worry that externalizing it (hence making it a
> *separate* piece of software that needs to be discovered and
> installed, which seems simple but can be quite a challenge to new
> coders) might take away Django's non-expert appeal. When I started
> using Django, I knew no python. The only reason I was able to make
> that work was because of the Django admin. If the admin gets kicked
> out, I think it should be made *very* obvious where to find one.
>
> I'd be wary of putting them in core but I think using Bootstrap and
> Less for a new admin (whether internal or external) would make its
> development much faster. Dependencies should not be a problem. I think
> jQuery is a pretty apt analogy here. You probably won't write much
> javascript for the Django admin without learning jQuery. You can if
> you want to. But most people don't need or want to write javascript
> for the Django admin anyway. I think a framework like Bootstrap it
> would actually simplify adding new features. It provides so many CSS
> classes that there's a pretty good chance your feature wouldn't
> require you to write even a line of CSS. I was able to convert an
> unstyled app that I've been working on to functionally using Bootstrap
> in just about an hour after starting to learn it.
>
> That having been said, I'd still be cautious with Bootstrap. It is a
> young piece of software that is incredibly impressive and mind-
> bogglingly easy to use, but obviously still in flux.
>
> On Feb 2, 5:38 pm, Sean Brant  wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Alex Gaynor 
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Adrian Holovaty 
> wrote:
> >
> > >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Sean Brant 
> wrote:
> > >> > Is this up somewhere public? I've been fighting the urge to do this
> as
> > >> > well. Using django-compressor with less on Heroku is a non-starter
> > >> > since you can't install node. Having this as a Python module would
> be
> > >> > handy.
> >
> > >> Not yet, alas, but hopefully soon.
> >
> > >> Adrian
> >
> > >> --
> > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> > >> "Django developers" group.
> > >> To post to this group, send email to
> django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > >> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> > >> For more options, visit this group at
> > >>http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
> >
> > > Perhaps this is too far in the future looking.  But at a certain point
> the
> > > admin must become a separate project.  One of the major goals of
> > > newforms-admin ('lo those years ago) was to demote the admin from
> special
> > > status, with hooks inside core left and right, to "just an app".  Let's
> > > carry that to the logical conclusion: just an app *outside of Django*.
> >
> > > That gives the maintainers the freedom to reinvent it, and use tools
> like
> > > less or bootstrap without it needing to be an issue of policy for all
> of
> > > Django.  Because when I first read saw this thread my thought was,
> "Hmm,
> > > what unholy mess of requirements am I going to need if I want to just
> run
> > > the test suite.  Will I still be able to write new features in forms
> without
> > > needing to learn what the hell less or compass is?".  Several years
> ago, I
> > > opposed using jQuery in the admin, on the principle that Django should
> be
> > > completely free of entangling alliances.  I made that argument more or
> less
> > > out of habit, just because I felt it was an argument that ought to be
> made,
> > > but really I was pretty happy to get to use jQuery.  Now I'm saying,
> it's
> > > pretty clear that admin 2.0 (or 3.0, or 4.0, anyone counting?) is
> going to
> > > be a beast that far outstrips almost anything else in Djanog (besides
> the
> > > ORM ;)) in complexity, with more dependencies,
> more associated tooling, and
> > > more usecases (i.e. it's not just a tool for developers to use, it's
> also
> > > something for end users of *our* users' apps to use).  Keeping that in
> > > Django itself is going to stunt it's growth, and it's going to suck
> for new
> > > developers to Django who, like many of us (or at least myself), were
> and
> > > still are, Python developers at heart, who can write some HTML, badly.
> >
> > > Alex
> >
> > > --
> > > "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your
> right to
> > > say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire)
> > > "The people's good is the 

Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-03 Thread Brendan Smith
I give +1 to the idea of separating out the admin and letting people fork and 
modify to their hearts content

I also still give my +1 to having it utilize less, but I am also cautious like 
others about prescribing bootstrap specifically , especially the JS since as 
others have pointed out is somewhat unstable right now and not very easy to use 
at times (took me a long time to figure out modals)

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 3, 2012, at 1:25 AM, Harris Lapiroff  wrote:

> The Django admin is a major—if not *the* major—selling point to
> budding developers. I worry that externalizing it (hence making it a
> *separate* piece of software that needs to be discovered and
> installed, which seems simple but can be quite a challenge to new
> coders) might take away Django's non-expert appeal. When I started
> using Django, I knew no python. The only reason I was able to make
> that work was because of the Django admin. If the admin gets kicked
> out, I think it should be made *very* obvious where to find one.
> 
> I'd be wary of putting them in core but I think using Bootstrap and
> Less for a new admin (whether internal or external) would make its
> development much faster. Dependencies should not be a problem. I think
> jQuery is a pretty apt analogy here. You probably won't write much
> javascript for the Django admin without learning jQuery. You can if
> you want to. But most people don't need or want to write javascript
> for the Django admin anyway. I think a framework like Bootstrap it
> would actually simplify adding new features. It provides so many CSS
> classes that there's a pretty good chance your feature wouldn't
> require you to write even a line of CSS. I was able to convert an
> unstyled app that I've been working on to functionally using Bootstrap
> in just about an hour after starting to learn it.
> 
> That having been said, I'd still be cautious with Bootstrap. It is a
> young piece of software that is incredibly impressive and mind-
> bogglingly easy to use, but obviously still in flux.
> 
> On Feb 2, 5:38 pm, Sean Brant  wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Alex Gaynor  wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Adrian Holovaty  wrote:
>> 
 On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Sean Brant  wrote:
> Is this up somewhere public? I've been fighting the urge to do this as
> well. Using django-compressor with less on Heroku is a non-starter
> since you can't install node. Having this as a Python module would be
> handy.
>> 
 Not yet, alas, but hopefully soon.
>> 
 Adrian
>> 
 --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
 "Django developers" group.
 To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
 django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 For more options, visit this group at
 http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>> 
>>> Perhaps this is too far in the future looking.  But at a certain point the
>>> admin must become a separate project.  One of the major goals of
>>> newforms-admin ('lo those years ago) was to demote the admin from special
>>> status, with hooks inside core left and right, to "just an app".  Let's
>>> carry that to the logical conclusion: just an app *outside of Django*.
>> 
>>> That gives the maintainers the freedom to reinvent it, and use tools like
>>> less or bootstrap without it needing to be an issue of policy for all of
>>> Django.  Because when I first read saw this thread my thought was, "Hmm,
>>> what unholy mess of requirements am I going to need if I want to just run
>>> the test suite.  Will I still be able to write new features in forms without
>>> needing to learn what the hell less or compass is?".  Several years ago, I
>>> opposed using jQuery in the admin, on the principle that Django should be
>>> completely free of entangling alliances.  I made that argument more or less
>>> out of habit, just because I felt it was an argument that ought to be made,
>>> but really I was pretty happy to get to use jQuery.  Now I'm saying, it's
>>> pretty clear that admin 2.0 (or 3.0, or 4.0, anyone counting?) is going to
>>> be a beast that far outstrips almost anything else in Djanog (besides the
>>> ORM ;)) in complexity, with more dependencies, more associated tooling, and
>>> more usecases (i.e. it's not just a tool for developers to use, it's also
>>> something for end users of *our* users' apps to use).  Keeping that in
>>> Django itself is going to stunt it's growth, and it's going to suck for new
>>> developers to Django who, like many of us (or at least myself), were and
>>> still are, Python developers at heart, who can write some HTML, badly.
>> 
>>> Alex
>> 
>>> --
>>> "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to
>>> say it." -- 

Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-02 Thread Harris Lapiroff
The Django admin is a major—if not *the* major—selling point to
budding developers. I worry that externalizing it (hence making it a
*separate* piece of software that needs to be discovered and
installed, which seems simple but can be quite a challenge to new
coders) might take away Django's non-expert appeal. When I started
using Django, I knew no python. The only reason I was able to make
that work was because of the Django admin. If the admin gets kicked
out, I think it should be made *very* obvious where to find one.

I'd be wary of putting them in core but I think using Bootstrap and
Less for a new admin (whether internal or external) would make its
development much faster. Dependencies should not be a problem. I think
jQuery is a pretty apt analogy here. You probably won't write much
javascript for the Django admin without learning jQuery. You can if
you want to. But most people don't need or want to write javascript
for the Django admin anyway. I think a framework like Bootstrap it
would actually simplify adding new features. It provides so many CSS
classes that there's a pretty good chance your feature wouldn't
require you to write even a line of CSS. I was able to convert an
unstyled app that I've been working on to functionally using Bootstrap
in just about an hour after starting to learn it.

That having been said, I'd still be cautious with Bootstrap. It is a
young piece of software that is incredibly impressive and mind-
bogglingly easy to use, but obviously still in flux.

On Feb 2, 5:38 pm, Sean Brant  wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Alex Gaynor  wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Adrian Holovaty  wrote:
>
> >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Sean Brant  wrote:
> >> > Is this up somewhere public? I've been fighting the urge to do this as
> >> > well. Using django-compressor with less on Heroku is a non-starter
> >> > since you can't install node. Having this as a Python module would be
> >> > handy.
>
> >> Not yet, alas, but hopefully soon.
>
> >> Adrian
>
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> >> "Django developers" group.
> >> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> >> For more options, visit this group at
> >>http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>
> > Perhaps this is too far in the future looking.  But at a certain point the
> > admin must become a separate project.  One of the major goals of
> > newforms-admin ('lo those years ago) was to demote the admin from special
> > status, with hooks inside core left and right, to "just an app".  Let's
> > carry that to the logical conclusion: just an app *outside of Django*.
>
> > That gives the maintainers the freedom to reinvent it, and use tools like
> > less or bootstrap without it needing to be an issue of policy for all of
> > Django.  Because when I first read saw this thread my thought was, "Hmm,
> > what unholy mess of requirements am I going to need if I want to just run
> > the test suite.  Will I still be able to write new features in forms without
> > needing to learn what the hell less or compass is?".  Several years ago, I
> > opposed using jQuery in the admin, on the principle that Django should be
> > completely free of entangling alliances.  I made that argument more or less
> > out of habit, just because I felt it was an argument that ought to be made,
> > but really I was pretty happy to get to use jQuery.  Now I'm saying, it's
> > pretty clear that admin 2.0 (or 3.0, or 4.0, anyone counting?) is going to
> > be a beast that far outstrips almost anything else in Djanog (besides the
> > ORM ;)) in complexity, with more dependencies, more associated tooling, and
> > more usecases (i.e. it's not just a tool for developers to use, it's also
> > something for end users of *our* users' apps to use).  Keeping that in
> > Django itself is going to stunt it's growth, and it's going to suck for new
> > developers to Django who, like many of us (or at least myself), were and
> > still are, Python developers at heart, who can write some HTML, badly.
>
> > Alex
>
> > --
> > "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to
> > say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire)
> > "The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Django developers" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>
> +1
>
> Given how flexible the admin is doing somethings is still pretty
> 

Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-02 Thread Sean Brant
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Alex Gaynor  wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Adrian Holovaty  wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Sean Brant  wrote:
>> > Is this up somewhere public? I've been fighting the urge to do this as
>> > well. Using django-compressor with less on Heroku is a non-starter
>> > since you can't install node. Having this as a Python module would be
>> > handy.
>>
>> Not yet, alas, but hopefully soon.
>>
>> Adrian
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Django developers" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>>
>
> Perhaps this is too far in the future looking.  But at a certain point the
> admin must become a separate project.  One of the major goals of
> newforms-admin ('lo those years ago) was to demote the admin from special
> status, with hooks inside core left and right, to "just an app".  Let's
> carry that to the logical conclusion: just an app *outside of Django*.
>
> That gives the maintainers the freedom to reinvent it, and use tools like
> less or bootstrap without it needing to be an issue of policy for all of
> Django.  Because when I first read saw this thread my thought was, "Hmm,
> what unholy mess of requirements am I going to need if I want to just run
> the test suite.  Will I still be able to write new features in forms without
> needing to learn what the hell less or compass is?".  Several years ago, I
> opposed using jQuery in the admin, on the principle that Django should be
> completely free of entangling alliances.  I made that argument more or less
> out of habit, just because I felt it was an argument that ought to be made,
> but really I was pretty happy to get to use jQuery.  Now I'm saying, it's
> pretty clear that admin 2.0 (or 3.0, or 4.0, anyone counting?) is going to
> be a beast that far outstrips almost anything else in Djanog (besides the
> ORM ;)) in complexity, with more dependencies, more associated tooling, and
> more usecases (i.e. it's not just a tool for developers to use, it's also
> something for end users of *our* users' apps to use).  Keeping that in
> Django itself is going to stunt it's growth, and it's going to suck for new
> developers to Django who, like many of us (or at least myself), were and
> still are, Python developers at heart, who can write some HTML, badly.
>
> Alex
>
> --
> "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to
> say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire)
> "The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.

+1

Given how flexible the admin is doing somethings is still pretty
annoying. I feel like if it was a external project with its own
release schedule more progress could be made. FWIW i'm experimenting
with an admin interface that relies heavily on class based views. So
far I like it. CBVs seem to have more useful hooks then the admin
currently has. At the very least I think the new admin needs to not be
backwards compatible with the current admin.

So my vote is for django-admin2 as an external project.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-02 Thread Travis Swicegood
I'm sure Idan can add to this if he cares to, but at Djangocon kicking the
admin out of django.contrib for admin2 was something that was actively
considered, both during development and, depending on how it worked out,
possibly as its new home.

I'm massively +1 on that because it does allow a lot of "freedom" to people
wanting to experiment with it and new ways of handling administrative tasks.

-T


On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Alex Gaynor  wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Sean Brant  wrote:
>> > Is this up somewhere public? I've been fighting the urge to do this as
>> > well. Using django-compressor with less on Heroku is a non-starter
>> > since you can't install node. Having this as a Python module would be
>> > handy.
>>
>> Not yet, alas, but hopefully soon.
>>
>> Adrian
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Django developers" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>>
>>
> Perhaps this is too far in the future looking.  But at a certain point the
> admin must become a separate project.  One of the major goals of
> newforms-admin ('lo those years ago) was to demote the admin from special
> status, with hooks inside core left and right, to "just an app".  Let's
> carry that to the logical conclusion: just an app *outside of Django*.
>
> That gives the maintainers the freedom to reinvent it, and use tools like
> less or bootstrap without it needing to be an issue of policy for all of
> Django.  Because when I first read saw this thread my thought was, "Hmm,
> what unholy mess of requirements am I going to need if I want to just run
> the test suite.  Will I still be able to write new features in forms
> without needing to learn what the hell less or compass is?".  Several years
> ago, I opposed using jQuery in the admin, on the principle that Django
> should be completely free of entangling alliances.  I made that argument
> more or less out of habit, just because I felt it was an argument that
> ought to be made, but really I was pretty happy to get to use jQuery.  Now
> I'm saying, it's pretty clear that admin 2.0 (or 3.0, or 4.0, anyone
> counting?) is going to be a beast that far outstrips almost anything else
> in Djanog (besides the ORM ;)) in complexity, with more dependencies,
> more associated tooling, and more usecases (i.e. it's not just a tool for
> developers to use, it's also something for end users of *our* users' apps
> to use).  Keeping that in Django itself is going to stunt it's growth, and
> it's going to suck for new developers to Django who, like many of us (or at
> least myself), were and still are, Python developers at heart, who can
> write some HTML, badly.
>
> Alex
>
> --
> "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right
> to say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire)
> "The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>



-- 
Travis Swicegood | @tswicegood (most everywhere) | Senior Open Source
Engineer @ Texas Tribune / Armstrong | 512.693.7051

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-02 Thread Alex Gaynor
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Adrian Holovaty  wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Sean Brant  wrote:
> > Is this up somewhere public? I've been fighting the urge to do this as
> > well. Using django-compressor with less on Heroku is a non-starter
> > since you can't install node. Having this as a Python module would be
> > handy.
>
> Not yet, alas, but hopefully soon.
>
> Adrian
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>
>
Perhaps this is too far in the future looking.  But at a certain point the
admin must become a separate project.  One of the major goals of
newforms-admin ('lo those years ago) was to demote the admin from special
status, with hooks inside core left and right, to "just an app".  Let's
carry that to the logical conclusion: just an app *outside of Django*.

That gives the maintainers the freedom to reinvent it, and use tools like
less or bootstrap without it needing to be an issue of policy for all of
Django.  Because when I first read saw this thread my thought was, "Hmm,
what unholy mess of requirements am I going to need if I want to just run
the test suite.  Will I still be able to write new features in forms
without needing to learn what the hell less or compass is?".  Several years
ago, I opposed using jQuery in the admin, on the principle that Django
should be completely free of entangling alliances.  I made that argument
more or less out of habit, just because I felt it was an argument that
ought to be made, but really I was pretty happy to get to use jQuery.  Now
I'm saying, it's pretty clear that admin 2.0 (or 3.0, or 4.0, anyone
counting?) is going to be a beast that far outstrips almost anything else
in Djanog (besides the ORM ;)) in complexity, with more dependencies,
more associated tooling, and more usecases (i.e. it's not just a tool for
developers to use, it's also something for end users of *our* users' apps
to use).  Keeping that in Django itself is going to stunt it's growth, and
it's going to suck for new developers to Django who, like many of us (or at
least myself), were and still are, Python developers at heart, who can
write some HTML, badly.

Alex

-- 
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to
say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire)
"The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-02 Thread Adrian Holovaty
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Sean Brant  wrote:
> Is this up somewhere public? I've been fighting the urge to do this as
> well. Using django-compressor with less on Heroku is a non-starter
> since you can't install node. Having this as a Python module would be
> handy.

Not yet, alas, but hopefully soon.

Adrian

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-02 Thread Paul Egges
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Adam "Cezar" Jenkins  wrote:

>  ...
>
As far as core. Bootstrap should be a 3rd party app, but possibly having
> less support in core might be helpful.
>
>
>
Funny how that reads. Perhaps for clarity it should say but ' ... possibly
having support for "less" in core might be helpful.'  But then again, my
English usually leaves a lot to be desired.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-02 Thread Adam "Cezar" Jenkins
A note that if you use the project django-compressor you can put something
like the following into your templates and it will automatically compile
the less

{% compress css %}

{% endcompress %}

No need to compile by hand.

A note about bootstrap. I'm using it for my project and I've run across
some pretty glaring bugs in the javascript it ships with. They don't keep
the master branch stable, and are in the middle of merging the 2.0 work in
progress branch into master. So there is a little bit of instability. Not
the end of the world though, I still recommend it.

As far as core. Bootstrap should be a 3rd party app, but possibly having
less support in core might be helpful.

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Adrian Holovaty  wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Idan Gazit  wrote:
> > * less.js has the distinct advantage of being easier to develop for than
> > sass for our purposes.If we go with a less.js solution (like bootstrap),
> we
> > might not need to require that all edits to admin "source" stylesheets
> > (less/scss) come with the recompiled CSS. This lowers the barrier to
> > contribution significantly, at the cost of a bit of site performance as
> less
> > gets compiled client-side. That being said, the admin isn't supposed to
> be
> > used as a a high-traffic site (or shouldn't be, I can't say how people
> abuse
> > it).
>
> Two points:
>
> * If we decide to change the admin site to use LESS, we should ship
> compiled CSS. No need to introduce the less.js overhead.
>
> * I have been working on a Python LESS compiler in my spare time, and
> there could be a use for it in here.
>
> Adrian
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-02 Thread Sean Brant
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Adrian Holovaty  wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Idan Gazit  wrote:
>> * less.js has the distinct advantage of being easier to develop for than
>> sass for our purposes.If we go with a less.js solution (like bootstrap), we
>> might not need to require that all edits to admin "source" stylesheets
>> (less/scss) come with the recompiled CSS. This lowers the barrier to
>> contribution significantly, at the cost of a bit of site performance as less
>> gets compiled client-side. That being said, the admin isn't supposed to be
>> used as a a high-traffic site (or shouldn't be, I can't say how people abuse
>> it).
>
> Two points:
>
> * If we decide to change the admin site to use LESS, we should ship
> compiled CSS. No need to introduce the less.js overhead.
>
> * I have been working on a Python LESS compiler in my spare time, and
> there could be a use for it in here.


Is this up somewhere public? I've been fighting the urge to do this as
well. Using django-compressor with less on Heroku is a non-starter
since you can't install node. Having this as a Python module would be
handy.


> Adrian
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-02 Thread Adrian Holovaty
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Idan Gazit  wrote:
> * less.js has the distinct advantage of being easier to develop for than
> sass for our purposes.If we go with a less.js solution (like bootstrap), we
> might not need to require that all edits to admin "source" stylesheets
> (less/scss) come with the recompiled CSS. This lowers the barrier to
> contribution significantly, at the cost of a bit of site performance as less
> gets compiled client-side. That being said, the admin isn't supposed to be
> used as a a high-traffic site (or shouldn't be, I can't say how people abuse
> it).

Two points:

* If we decide to change the admin site to use LESS, we should ship
compiled CSS. No need to introduce the less.js overhead.

* I have been working on a Python LESS compiler in my spare time, and
there could be a use for it in here.

Adrian

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-02 Thread Donald Stufft


On Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Idan Gazit wrote:

> The next major revision of the admin will definitely use either less or sass, 
> because it is uncivilized to work without such lovely tools nowadays.
> 
> I'm less certain about bootstrap. It has some pros and cons:
> 
> Pros:
> * widely used (and thus widely understood)
> * We won't need to invent our own style guide for the new admin. If you're 
> developing a plugin or an extension and you're using the bootstrap styles, 
> your thing willl mesh nicely with the rest of the admin.
> * less.js has the distinct advantage of being easier to develop for than sass 
> for our purposes.If we go with a less.js solution (like bootstrap), we might 
> not need to require that all edits to admin "source" stylesheets (less/scss) 
> come with the recompiled CSS. This lowers the barrier to contribution 
> significantly, at the cost of a bit of site performance as less gets compiled 
> client-side. That being said, the admin isn't supposed to be used as a a 
> high-traffic site (or shouldn't be, I can't say how people abuse it).
> 
> 

It should only get compiled the first time, after then it get's cached client 
side IIRC (for less.js). 
> 
> Cons:
> * less has no equivalent to compass, which is chock full of reusable stuff.
> * I'm already having a bit of a negative reaction to the ubiquity of the 
> bootstrap "look" on the web. That being said, it's relatively easy to alter 
> some styles, but then we make the job of 3rd party admin extenders harder, 
> because they must deviate from the default bootstrap style to fit into the 
> admin.
>  
> -I
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Django developers" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/-/QxpHySYhgDgJ.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com 
> (mailto:django-developers@googlegroups.com).
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> (mailto:django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com).
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-02 Thread Idan Gazit
The next major revision of the admin will definitely use either less or 
sass, because it is uncivilized to work without such lovely tools nowadays.

I'm less certain about bootstrap. It has some pros and cons:

Pros:
* widely used (and thus widely understood)
* We won't need to invent our own style guide for the new admin. If you're 
developing a plugin or an extension and you're using the bootstrap styles, 
your thing willl mesh nicely with the rest of the admin.
* less.js has the distinct advantage of being easier to develop for than 
sass for our purposes.If we go with a less.js solution (like bootstrap), we 
might not need to require that all edits to admin "source" stylesheets 
(less/scss) come with the recompiled CSS. This lowers the barrier to 
contribution significantly, at the cost of a bit of site performance as 
less gets compiled client-side. That being said, the admin isn't supposed 
to be used as a a high-traffic site (or shouldn't be, I can't say how 
people abuse it).

Cons:
* less has no equivalent to compass, which is chock full of reusable stuff.
* I'm already having a bit of a negative reaction to the ubiquity of the 
bootstrap "look" on the web. That being said, it's relatively easy to alter 
some styles, but then we make the job of 3rd party admin extenders harder, 
because they must deviate from the default bootstrap style to fit into the 
admin.
 
-I

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/-/QxpHySYhgDgJ.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-02 Thread Donald Stufft
I don't think this is really appropriate in core. Django itself is completely 
agnostic as to what you output, it doesn't pay attention to html, xml, csv, 
css, or anything. 

However if this is just an app you are making then sure. For what it's worth 
Pinax (a sort of collection of apps/conventions built on top of Django) has 
"themes" in 0.9a2, and the default theme is a bootstrap theme/app somewhat like 
you are suggesting. 


On Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Brendan Smith wrote:

> for what's it worth, i really like the idea of this. 
> 
> i am also starting to use less for all of my projects and i love it.
> 
> and for the record, with less.js it's not actually necessary to compile the 
> .less files on the backend every time you make changes, you can have the 
> compilation done on the front end and the browser will catch the results for 
> future requests.
> 
> 
> 
> On Feb 2, 2012, at 2:28 PM, Ric wrote:
> 
> > hi, i want to propose a long term idea.
> > 
> > start using a less framework inside django.
> > 
> > i'm using bootstrap for my django app. it's really cool.
> > 
> > what i'am doing now is writing with less a new css to style django
> > admin.
> > 
> > my idea is that django should provide a faster way to write an app,
> > and while django is absolutely awesome for writing server side code,
> > it does nothing to speed up css/html.
> > 
> > my idea is to write an app, with a setting object containing variables
> > for less (colors and so on, font style ecc) and then compile a less
> > for your current app.
> > 
> > a command like manage.py compileless could do the trick, and compile
> > css code for your app.
> > 
> > django should provide an html base template (used in admin too) that
> > is styled with a customizable less app.
> > 
> > it would be a great thing for django to give developers a fast start
> > for new apps with a built in less framework.
> > 
> > i'm using bootstrap, and it's great, with a few settings an user could
> > customize a base css, and do very cool things with few line of code.
> > 
> > i'm actually working to make it work with django, i hope it will be a
> > cool app.
> > 
> > -- 
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> > "Django developers" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com 
> > (mailto:django-developers@googlegroups.com).
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> > django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> > (mailto:django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com).
> > For more options, visit this group at 
> > http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
> > 
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com 
> (mailto:django-developers@googlegroups.com).
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> (mailto:django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com).
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
> 
> 


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



Re: start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-02 Thread Brendan Smith
for what's it worth, i really like the idea of this. 

i am also starting to use less for all of my projects and i love it.

 and for the record, with less.js it's not actually necessary to compile the 
.less files on the backend every time you make changes, you can have the 
compilation done on the front end and the browser will catch the results for 
future requests.



On Feb 2, 2012, at 2:28 PM, Ric wrote:

> hi, i want to propose a long term idea.
> 
> start using a less framework inside django.
> 
> i'm using bootstrap for my django app. it's really cool.
> 
> what i'am doing now is writing with less a new css to style django
> admin.
> 
> my idea is that django should provide a faster way to write an app,
> and while django is absolutely awesome for writing server side code,
> it does nothing to speed up css/html.
> 
> my idea is to write an app, with a setting object containing variables
> for less (colors and so on, font style ecc) and then compile a less
> for your current app.
> 
> a command like manage.py compileless could do the trick, and compile
> css code for your app.
> 
> django should provide an html base template (used in admin too) that
> is styled with a customizable less app.
> 
> it would be a great thing for django to give developers a fast start
> for new apps with a built in less framework.
> 
> i'm using bootstrap, and it's great, with a few settings an user could
> customize a base css, and do very cool things with few line of code.
> 
> i'm actually working to make it work with django, i hope it will be a
> cool app.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Django developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
> 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.



start using less (and bootstrap!)

2012-02-02 Thread Ric
hi, i want to propose a long term idea.

start using a less framework inside django.

i'm using bootstrap for my django app. it's really cool.

what i'am doing now is writing with less a new css to style django
admin.

my idea is that django should provide a faster way to write an app,
and while django is absolutely awesome for writing server side code,
it does nothing to speed up css/html.

my idea is to write an app, with a setting object containing variables
for less (colors and so on, font style ecc) and then compile a less
for your current app.

a command like manage.py compileless could do the trick, and compile
css code for your app.

django should provide an html base template (used in admin too) that
is styled with a customizable less app.

it would be a great thing for django to give developers a fast start
for new apps with a built in less framework.

i'm using bootstrap, and it's great, with a few settings an user could
customize a base css, and do very cool things with few line of code.

i'm actually working to make it work with django, i hope it will be a
cool app.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.