So far nothing changed yet. So far I did exactly what you said and I just reposted plugin_t2 making sure the t2.py is the same as the t3 one.
I just do not want to maintain two apps that share mostly the same files. Let's keep this discussion going. I am not sure myself what the best way is. Massimo On Dec 15, 1:33 pm, Kacper Krupa <pageno...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree with ceej, he's right. > > On 15 Gru, 20:27, ceej <cjlaz...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > I understand what you are saying Massimo and Vince, but what I mean is > > I just think t2 should be kept separate and maintained as a sort of > > plugin and I think vince you proved my point by saying "web2py, T2 and > > T3 are quite confusing, i guess we may need a plugins system for > > web2py. " I don't think merging t2 with t3 and then adding t3 specific > > things into t2 was a good idea I think you should have extended t2 in > > a separate module for t3 specific things, because one I think it > > confuses things like Vince points out and two could cause a lot of > > trouble down the line when people just want to plugin t2. > > > On Dec 15, 12:36 am, vince <lapcc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > i've been playing with T3, T3 actually is a sample wiki build on top > > > of T2 plus some extra features too. > > > > i think what Massimo mean is he will no longer distribute T2 itself as > > > you can find it on T3. right? > > > > web2py, T2 and T3 are quite confusing, i guess we may need a plugins > > > system for web2py. > > > > vince > > > > On Dec 15, 2:01 pm, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote: > > > > > This is what I meant. t2 is contained and will be contained in t3. > > > > > On Dec 14, 4:11 pm, ceej <cjlaz...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I like the idea of t3 but I also really like the idea of t2, I feel t2 > > > > > should be separate from t3 and the extra features in t2 that are > > > > > specifically for t3 should be in a separate module extending t2. > > > > > Because t2 is a great module to plug into any application and helps > > > > > speed up the development process. Which I think a lot of developers > > > > > like the idea of. T3 is more of an application already for someone to > > > > > build on top of and is ok for certain types of projects. So I really > > > > > think we should consider "merging" t2 into t3. > > > > > > What are other peoples thoughts? > > > > > > On Dec 14, 9:51 am, Joe Barnhart <joe.barnh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > In keeping with the web2py theme, a couple which come to mind are: > > > > > > > app2py > > > > > > > webapp2py > > > > > > > On Dec 10, 4:13 pm, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > > This is not the final word. I think we need a better name. T3 is > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > easily identifiable. > > > > > > > > Suggestions? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py Web Framework" group. To post to this group, send email to web2py@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
