Sorry for taking a bit long to respond. Looks like we aren't disagree much anyway but I had to get some thoughts off my chest :-).
Vinay Sajip wrote: > It's similar to Django's support for, say, simplejson. I think it's > reasonable for Django to alias WatchedFileHandler so that it's > available either bound to logging's own implementation (in > sufficiently recent versions of Python) or else a copy in Django's own > code. Then people can use it if they want to, even in older Python > versions. Agreed. > I have no big problem with a configuration scheme such as you suggest > - if it's felt that a lot of Django users are not Python-savvy enough > and need some hand-holding Uhm... No this is not about hand-holding or something like that. I propose a format that is shorter and more convenient than the ConfigParser's. This is the point. > My reservation with Django's own take on it is simply > that it goes against TOOWTDI and the Zen of Python, a little at least. Yes, this is the bad part about it. However the Zen of Python is not a dogma and its application is subjective. I think my proposal still stands and the decision is left for core devs. As for me I'll most probably play with the implementation of parsing of this format for our own projects anyway. I'll file it as a ticket if I would still like it by that time :-). --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
