On Saturday 04 July 2009 02:31:26 Chris Ball wrote: > Hi Gianluca, > > > As i said in a previous mail, I am working on a "html" command > > for be. The goal is to be able to do something like "be html > > /web/page" to have in the /web/page directory some static html > > pages that basically are the dump of the be repository, much like > > ditz have. This will enable a simple and fast publish of the bus > > list and details on the web, at least in read only mode. > > It might be a good idea for "be html" to use the CherryPy web interface > that Steve is working on. The command could start up the CherryPy app > and scrape all of the available pages to get a stand-alone dump; this > would avoid having to keep two (okay, more than two at this point) > separate sets of HTML templates in the source tree. What do you think? It can be do, but this implies that CherryPy must be installed and configured, a thing that I don't want to impose. My idea is to offer a simpler way to have some html pages, where you just need to have BE installed. My very first implementation was a script that parse directly the .be directory to build the pages, without BE itself installed. > > 2) I see that every command is implemented with a python file in > > the becommand dir. For a better code, I'd like to split the > > command implementation into two files: a file that contain the > > actual code and a second file that have the html related part, > > any problem with this ? I don't like to have the html part and > > the code part in one big and unreadable file. > > I agree that becommands/*.py commands should not contain any HTML > layout code. Putting it somewhere else instead sounds fine. I am in doubt with the "somewhere else", since for now I put the html template into a separate file in the same directory. Suggestion ? thanks bye Gianluca _______________________________________________ Be-devel mailing list Be-devel@bugseverywhere.org http://void.printf.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/be-devel