"Adrian Holovaty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 10/5/06, David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> So the idea is to map certain URLs into that view, have the view parse >> the URL to find the files in the SVN working copy that it should use >> to generate the page, use those files to generate a data structure on >> which the template can operate, and pass the data structure off to the >> rendering code? Wow, suddenly that looks easy. > > Yes, that's exactly it. Like I said, there's no need to use a > database. Glad you've got it. :)
Just to clarify: I intend to use a database; I just have some particular ideas about what kinds of things should be kept there. What I'm still wondering about, though, is whether this isn't a common usage model that should be more explicitly supported by the framework (or its docs, if there's _really_ no code you can write to support it)? Call me fastidious, but it just seems like principled development to keep site content that isn't provided by users in revision control along with the code. Otherwise, rolling back to an earlier version of the site is sorta meaningless. Hmm, subversion uses a database. It would be kind of interesting to see a Django-like system built atop something like subversion. User edits could create/edit YAML, for example. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" 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/django-users -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
