On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Phill Tornroth <famousactr...@gmail.com>wrote:
> 'Ello. > > I'm gauging support for a tiny new feature, or at least a refactoring of > an internal API that will allow the feature to be developed without code > duplication. I'd like to stop typing import statements for all of my models > and other common stuff into my django shell. In fact, I'd love for all of > us to stop typing those import statements! I tossed up the following pull > requests as an example for how this might look: > > https://github.com/django/django/pull/303 > > This is effectively a subset of the functionality that shell_plus [1] > appears to provide. The problem that I have with building my own, or with > using shell_plus is that the shell command doesn't allow this change to be > built without effectively copying the entire internal implementation of the > shell command. New features added to, or issues fixed in shell will have to > be copied over to shell_plus, or our homegrown solutions which is > unfortunate. So at the very least it seems reasonable to provide something > like the get_initial_shell_locals method I added in my pull request, > which makes this feature easy enough to add without duplication. > > In fact, that's where my thinking started but I also don't see a downside > to providing this functionality in core either. I don't think it's > usefulness is particularly questionable or niche, as the existence of > shell_plus seems evidence of. > > I haven't opened a ticket because the contribution docs suggest gauging > consensus, first. So I think these are the two potential (not mutually > exclusive) changes worth gauging support for: > > 1. An overridable method (or some other internal API change?) to make it > possible to implement this functionality without copying the entire shell > implementation. > 2. A default implementation for said method that supports auto-importing > useful objects into the shell scope. > > > Curious to hear what people think. Of course, please let me know if I'm > going about this the wrong way. > > Thanks! > Phill > > [1]: > https://github.com/django-extensions/django-extensions/blob/master/django_extensions/management/commands/shell_plus.py > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django developers" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/-/gcpo73Sk5aMJ. > 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. > I'm pretty strongly -1 on this. I understand it can be a real convenience, but this is precisely the type of feature that makes things way more confusing for anyone who's new to a project, "Why are the things magically available here?". I realize this is "just" the shell, but I've been very critical of other frameworks for making things magically available, and I'm going to hold us to the same standard. Alex -- "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire) "The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero -- 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.
