[Grok-dev] Re: Admin UI name change suggestion
faassen at startifact.com
Mon Oct 8 14:17:23 EDT 2007
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> grok.Application by itself isn't implying it's necessarily a root of
>> anything; it's a mixin class and it's up to the person who writes the
>> application to make it some form of containerish thing.
> True. So, if it's entirely up to the application author to give it
> meaning, then what's in grok.Application currently? It really just gives
> us an "add menu item" in the admin UI, doesn't it.
> Then why don't we name it so? grok.AddableInAdminUI. Now, that obviously
> sucks. But perhaps we can make it a class-level directive::
> class TodoList(grok.Container):
> Admittedly, that still sucks. But you get the idea :).
Yes, but it all sucks more than grok.Application. If you mix in
grok.Application, you imply:
* it's an ISite thingy
* it's the root thingy of the application (even if it's not a container,
which typically it is)
* typically contains utilities with configuration state, typically with
some form of end-user configuration UI
* typically contains some indexes
* can get to it using application_url() and such
* is addable in admin UI
* could potentially have a title and description that show up in UIs
Moreover, you can say:
If you want to make some object into a new standalone application with
Grok, start with mixing in grok.Application.
I really think the word's just fine. :)
More information about the Grok-dev