On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 5:44 AM, Diez B. Roggisch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> because of the warnings the webhelpers-module issues, I got aware of
> the two different implementations.
>
> My colleague started using url_for, and prefers it because it will deal
> properly with relative urls - which is a great thing, as this makes
> controllers re-locatable.
>
> So my question is - is there any reason why tg.url is not based on url_for,
> and if not, shall I come forth with an implementation?

In tg2, there is no reason not to base url on url_for now that Routes
2 is out.   In fact, I've been thinking about needing to switch this
eventually, but it's not happened yet.  So, yea, feel free to make the
change in TG2.

--Mark

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TurboGears Trunk" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears-trunk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to