Yes, yes. Please re-invent the wheel once again. And while you are at it, you might just remove the dependancies on zope and storm, etc.
I think that you are missing the point that, at this time, this is intended to provide the capabilities that MM-core chooses not to implement. Those website components (HK and Postorius) are being driven by Django and you only make it more difficult to implement them when choose a different schema to model/present the data. On Apr 18, 2013, at 2:29 PM, Florian Fuchs <flo.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2013/4/18 Richard Wackerbarth <rich...@nfsnet.org>: >> On Apr 18, 2013, at 1:19 AM, Florian Fuchs <flo.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> 3) It doesn't need Django. >>> Since it will not deliver any HTML (except an oAuth login form -- see >>> 5.) and it doesn't need to be integrated into any existing web site, >>> we can choose a more light-weight framework. >> >> Here I take exception. Dismissing Django is a restriction that unnecessarily >> affects the ease of implementation and, in the common case, complicates the >> integration of the functionality. >> >> Although it could be implemented without Django, it could also be >> implemented as a Django "app". >> An instance of a django server can then serve the functionality. As an >> alternative, where appropriate, this "app" would directly "drop in" to an >> instance of Postorius or an enterprise website. >> >> One of the advantages of Django is that it can be used as a rapid >> prototyping mechanism. Simplified interfaces to the data are "free" and more >> elaborate ones can be added in an incremental fashion. >> Also, rather than writing custom modules for things such as authentication >> and REST interfaces, there is the large community of third-party extensions >> which readily integrate to provide that functionality. > > It's not that I don't want to use Django. I just wanted to point out > that we won't need much of it for a pure JSON API. OTOH adding a new > dependency by using another framework is probably not a good idea > either. So if we want to keep the number of dependencies low, the > alternative would probably be to use no framework at all and use > restish for the, well, REST stuff (or whatever library the core will > be using in the future). > > Florian > >> I would advocate that this "User" module make it appear as if stores the >> entire "record" for the user. >> In the implementation, it could actually store parts of the user information >> in multiple databases (one of which could be the MM-core). > > +1 _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
