This is based on the way I understand T2 and T3. I haven't actually used them, so I could be totally off base here.
On Dec 17, 1:38 pm, "Paul D. Eden" <benchl...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 for adding a plugin system to web2py and making T2 a plugin. I'm going to +1 that as well. > > A standardised and documented plugin system will, in an of itself, be > a great boon to web2py. > - Plugins (modules) are the reason that drupal became as big as it > did. It's easy enough to add modules into an application's module directory and then import them manually. It would be fairly slick to have them imported automatically. Personally, I don't want that. I'd rather have fine-grained control over what gets imported or not. But that doesn't seem to fit with web2py's basic philosophy, and it certainly doesn't fit all that well with a plugin-based architecture. I guess the real question is: what will the plugins do? If I want to add a plugin that I can call from within my code, to do something specific (I dunno...create a login DIV for every open ID provider known to man), then I should create that explicitly. If a plugin should make broad, site-wide changes (again, just pulling an example out of thin air), say it takes every <input type="file" /> tag on my site and replaces it with a SWF Uploader...I'd rather just copy that into a plugin directory and forget about it. When I think of plugins, I think of Gimp first. Install a plugin, and it adds options to (for example) the script_foo context menu. > > Now with that said, web2py already has applications. > > What exactly is the difference between plugins and applications? > - In my mind, applications are sets of files can run alone (and be > distributed via tar files (a great system is already in place for > doing this)) > and plugins would be meant as building blocks in applications or a > means of overriding and changing the default behaviour of web2py or an > application. Yep, two (or maybe 3) different issues/opportunities, as I see things. Personally, I'd like to see a 4th option, modelled from asp.net's controls. Inside my view, I'd like a way to reference other controllers and show the output from their views. Or maybe that's already there, and I just haven't been keeping up. Anyway, as I understand things: T2 is a module (plugin?) built on top of the web2py framework. T3 is an application that relies on T2. T2 will disappear as its own entity, because it will always be distributed with T3, and it's just silly to try to maintain multiple versions of the same code. Personally, I don't like that. But I'm a control freak. If I want to use just T2, then I don't want to be forced to also download T3. If I want to use T3, then I'm fine with also downloading (and installing) T2. That's just my opinion. The alternative point(s) of view is(/are) also completely valid, and probably more in-line with the basic philosophy behind web2py. Whichever way, this framework still rocks! Regards, James > > On Dec 15, 12:48 pm, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote: > > > 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 > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
