[Grok-dev] Re: Template pluggability and megrok.genshi finished.

Tres Seaver tseaver at palladion.com
Tue Oct 9 11:48:30 EDT 2007

Hash: SHA1

Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Tres Seaver wrote:
>> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>>> I think we should end up with two versions of the Genshi integration:
>>> * the unwieldy, strictly controlled version where nothing is in the 
>>> namespace except exactly what people pass in from their view. As far as 
>>> I understand it, we have the infrastructure to build this now.
>>> * the "wieldy" one, where we *definitely* should pass in the 'path' 
>>> function (as known from ZPT) into the Genshi template.
>>> Since we're working on the "wieldy" version first, I think we *should* 
>>> pass in 'path' (and call it that way).
>> Your terms imply an obvious loading:  how about "well-factored" vs.
>> "wild west" as alternatives?  Examples of the mess which which
>> pull-model templates organically grow are not exactly hard to find in
>> ZPT land.
> Whatever terms you like.

Sorry, I missed adding a smiley in there.  I was aiming to lighten it up.

> I think I understand the potential benefits of 
> a push model:
> http://faassen.n--tree.net/blog/view/weblog/2005/4/15/0
>> Nevertheless, for *Grok*, the restrictions of push mode may be
>> inappropriate.  Much of Grok's charm comes from its facilities for "solo
>> mode" development (saving typing is one of Grok's key memes).  In such
>> an environment, as opposed to multi-person, separation-
>> of-responsibilities kind of projects, the advantages of push-mode are
>> considerably less attractive.
> Yes, exactly. I think Grok should scale up, which is why I said I 
> thought it needed to support both. I think we figured out a way to do 
> that at the sprint, but we'll just have to try this a bit more. The wild 
> west approach seemed easiest to make progress on as it's so similar to 
> ZPT, so in the interests of making progress, I wanted to focus on this 
> initially.
> I think we're just violently agreeing here. :)

Amen.  Note that I think Grok's "scaling up" story (for team size) may
need attention in other places, too. E.g., Grok doesn't encourage TDD at
the moment, which I consider crucial for multi-person development.  The
whole "take over the root" discussion seems to be likewise driven by
"solo developer" notions, as well.

- --
Tres Seaver          +1 540-429-0999          tseaver at palladion.com
Palladion Software   "Excellence by Design"    http://palladion.com
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


More information about the Grok-dev mailing list