aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/.be/bugs/2f048ac5-5564-4b34-b7f9-605357267ed2/comments/83202b83-eea8-452f-8239-d468940bddba/body
blob: 9bf38517f2fd24957e8b5382871c55544f2eab37 (plain) (blame)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 10:50:17PM +0200, Gianluca Montecchi wrote:
> 
> Hello to everyone
> 
> 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.
> 
> So I'd like to ask some question:
> 1) is it ok to develop this command ? I know that this is not a fully featured 
> web interface, but I am sure that it can be usefull.
> 
> I am open to suggestion about it of course.
> 
> 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'd like to hear other opinion about this.
> 
> Thanks for now
> bye
> Gianluca
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Be-devel mailing list
> Be-devel@bugseverywhere.org
> http://void.printf.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/be-devel

On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 10:18:33PM +0200, Gianluca Montecchi wrote:
> This sound like an interesting idea, but what i'd like to do is not, strictly 
> speaking, a report. It is a full tree of html pages that are browseable, both 
> on line and offline

I'm not sure what distinction you're making about "report".  You're
just producing a static snapshot of the current database status,
right?  The number of pages and completeness of coverage are nice, but
it's still a static entity generated from a particular snapshot, which
is what I mean by "report" ;).

> > > 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 ?
> >
> > This sounds quite sensible to me. The existence of a command implies a
> > module of the same name in ‘becommand’, but there's no necessary
> > implication that that module can't import modules from elsewhere to do
> > its work.
> 
> The "elsewhere"  for now is the same directory, just another module
> 

On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 10:38:56PM +0200, Gianluca Montecchi wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 10:50:17PM +0200, Gianluca Montecchi wrote:
> > > 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
> >
> > I think truly interactive frontends like Steve's working on need to be
> > build on top of libbe directly, since they'll need to make lots of
> > small changes to the database, and it's to slow to be reloading the
> > database for every change.  Static dumps like my mbox or Gianluca's
> > html could just parse the xml output of `be list' and other be
> > commands.
> 
> Ok, but if I want to have an html dump that is browseable, I need to parse the 
> xml. Am I correct ? 
> If yes, should not be easiear to use directly the libbe ?

Using libbe directly is easier, but also more tightly tied to the be
internals which could weigh down future refactoring.  Partly I'm
afraid of our 2.5 different html-output mechanisms.  Either their
should be a single Right Way that tries to satisfy everyone, or a
smorgasbord of loosely coupled translators, so it's not so painful to
kill them if/when they go out of style :p.

On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 10:46:54PM +0200, Gianluca Montecchi wrote:
> On Saturday 04 July 2009 02:31:26 Chris Ball wrote:
> > 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.

I agree that not needing CherryPy for a static html dump is good.
Also, read-only templates will look different from the CherryPy
interactive templates.  +1 for another quasi-redundant template set
;).

> >    > 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 ?

I think that only code intended only for command line use only should
go into becommands, but really, just dump it anywhere and we can shift
it around later :p.

-- 
This email may be signed or encrypted with GPG (http://www.gnupg.org).
The GPG signature (if present) will be attached as 'signature.asc'.
For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy

My public key is at http://www.physics.drexel.edu/~wking/pubkey.txt