Not sure why so defensive. All I'm suggesting is that there is precedent in simpler routing schemes: consider django's (or Rails'), for instance. In django you have a urls.py at the root, and then optionally one in your app folder. You have to explicitly tell the root urls.py which urls to use for your app. There's no guesswork and no contingent and thus no confusion. The routes auto-discovery and contingencies, in this case, and in my opinion, are not intuitive and I would say against the core python concept of explicit over implicit.
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Anthony <abasta...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I would suggest the following behavior though: >> >> routes_in and routes out in the _base_ routes.py should be completely >> ignored if routes_app is not commented out. > > No, it should not. You may have multiple applications, but perhaps only some > of them have app-specific routes (i.e., a routes.py file in the application > folder). In that case, you want routes_app to match routes that belong to > the apps with app-specific routes, but you want any routes that don't match > routes_app to fall back to the routes_in/routes_out in your base routes.py > file. We do not want to completely ignore routes_in/routes_out any time > routes_app is present -- we only want to ignore them for the specific apps > that are matched in routes_app. > >> >> routes_app should be always completely ignored in _app-specific_ routes.py > > I believe this is already the case. The example file even says, "This entry > is meaningful only in the base routes.py." > > It might be easier if you describe the routing you're trying to do so we can > help you with your specific case. > > Anthony
