> I've noticed that this ticket would probably close 1.0's #830 and, after > considering the changes made, I feel it wouldn't be too risky to merge > this functionality into 1.0 (after we settle on the template_string > loading protocol and someone else tests those patches (hint, hint ;) )) > > I'm personally not using markup yet but I feel that leveraging the > template engine plugin architecture in widgets is the way to go, not only > from an asthetical viewpoint but from a consistency and flexibility > viewpoint too (#830).
You know more about the risk than me, but if there are good tests, and they pass, I think that says something. And I think it would be great to have second class citizen Markup support to match SQLAlchemy in showing people the future. On the other hand, it is very nice to have one clear path in the present. We just need to be careful that the KID story stays first, and we tell people that they should be using Kid whenever they want stability and good docs. The adventurous can go with Markup and SA, and see where that takes them, and more power to them. But the defaults need to stay clear and obvious. --mark -- Mark Ramm-Christensen email: mark at compoundthinking dot com blog: www.compoundthinking.com/blog --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears Trunk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears-trunk -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
