On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 2:01 AM, Michael <michael.hu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Do you think it is relevant to rewrite databrowse to use the new class- > based generic views ? > I'm motivate to work around this and submit a patch, but want first to > discuss about what to do.. > IMHO, contrib.databrowse (using class-based views) can provide a > reusable/extendable "base" for rapid development. > > Do you use databrowse ? and how (extending the classes ? , or just by > providing your own the template ?) > a JSON/CSV/XLS output could be useful too in databrowse (theses two > last formats could also become core.serializers btw.)
Hi Michael, Databrowse hasn't seen a whole lot of attention since it was originally added, so there is almost certainly room for improvement. Moving to class-based views might be part of that process. If you want to adopt databrowse as a pet project and improve it, I certainly encourage you to do so. However, please don't just submit a patch that 'replaces function views with class-based views'. Change for the sake of change isn't something we generally encourage. Unless there's a compelling reason to migrate to class-based views, there's not a lot of reason to make changes to code that works. There was a recent discussion about porting the contrib.auth views to class-based views which received a simliar reception. I look forward to any proposals you may have for improving databrowse! Yours, Russ Magee %-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
