If most everyone agrees that Tom's Vanilla Views are superior than what's currently in core, maybe the path forward is to integrate into 2.0?
On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 3:00:03 PM UTC-5, Adam Johnson wrote: > > Fair enough, there are other community resources for this. > > The PR adding a pointer in the docs to ccbv.co.uk in > https://github.com/django/django/pull/7785 is a good idea that came from > this thread though. > > On 4 January 2017 at 13:08, Tim Graham <timog...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > wrote: > >> We typically shy away from endorsing third-party libraries in the Django >> docs. I don't think it makes much sense to stay something to the effect of >> "The built-in views are too complex so we recommend using other library >> instead." >> >> >> On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 7:30:54 AM UTC-5, Asif Saifuddin wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I will update the doc pointing vanilla views as simpler alternative >>> implementation. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 7:20:24 PM UTC+6, Adam Johnson wrote: >>>> >>>> I think this is probably too disruptive a change for Django core, >>>> especially after so long with the current GCBV implementations - it would >>>> require all users to rewrite their CBV's. Possibly the documentation could >>>> recommend django-vanilla-views? >>>> >>>> On 3 January 2017 at 13:02, Asif Saifuddin <auv...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I have started work on https://github.com/django/django/pull/7783 for >>>>> converting django built in generic views to django-vanilla-views. >>>>> >>>>> I would like to hear what you think before I proceed for more. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Asif >>>>> >>>>> On Friday, September 16, 2016 at 1:37:36 AM UTC+6, Asif Saifuddin >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Tom, >>>>>> >>>>>> I am basically +1 to see this change in the django core. The package >>>>>> is 3 years old and should be tested enough. If you/other core team >>>>>> members >>>>>> thinks that now is a good time to include it to core and deprecation of >>>>>> older API, then I will be willing to work and send PR for this. >>>>>> >>>>>> Looking for others opinions. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>> Asif >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thursday, October 3, 2013 at 3:09:58 PM UTC+6, Tom Christie wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi folks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I recently released an alternative implementation of Django's >>>>>>> existing class based views. The intention was to mirror the *exact* >>>>>>> same >>>>>>> set of functionality that we currently provide, but simplify the >>>>>>> implementation and API. It's nothing cleverer or grander than a clean >>>>>>> re-write, but the end result is *significantly* less complex. The >>>>>>> class >>>>>>> hierarchy is trivial, the API is much smaller, and the flow control is >>>>>>> much >>>>>>> more obvious. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I won't go into any more here, as there's plenty of detail in the >>>>>>> documentation: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://django-vanilla-views.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There's also useful context in the related blog post, here: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://dabapps.com/blog/fixing-djangos-generic-class-based-views/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The difficult thing here really is that there's no obvious approach >>>>>>> to introducing something like this in a backwards compatible way. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It might be that we could take an incremental approach using the >>>>>>> standard deprecation process, but given the nature of the GCBVs it'd >>>>>>> likely >>>>>>> be pretty awkward. >>>>>>> There might be some bits of deprecation process we simply wouldn't >>>>>>> be able to deal with in any sensible way, and we'd certainly end up >>>>>>> with a >>>>>>> seriously gnarly implementation during the deprecation period. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd be interested in getting some opinions from folks on the >>>>>>> following: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * If a simpler GCBV implementation along the lines of >>>>>>> django-vanilla-views is something we think we should working towards. >>>>>>> * What approaches we might be able to take to dealing with backwards >>>>>>> compatibility if we did want to do so. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for your time. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Tom >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to django-d...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/5792872e-157c-4ba6-87c1-bf0f5a07d981%40googlegroups.com >>>>> >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/5792872e-157c-4ba6-87c1-bf0f5a07d981%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Adam >>>> >>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to django-d...@googlegroups.com >> <javascript:>. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/99823816-8352-40ba-99b7-bfe5006424a0%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/99823816-8352-40ba-99b7-bfe5006424a0%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > Adam > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/70be1e88-a915-48fa-861f-91deddbb2225%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
