Hey Mike, I agree with you that having questions would be nice. And for people not liking the questions, maybe we could have them answered automatically by passing options such as --with-sqla --with-zodb --with-mako --with-urldispatch, ... Just an idea.
We could also have just a bare bone Pyramid app with no template engine an no sqla/zodb. Such a setup could be for a webservice app that only returns JSON data, no HTML. 2010/11/10 Mike Orr <sluggos...@gmail.com>: > I think we need to think strategically about Pyramid's application > templates. There are already eight of them, with overlapping > functionality and inconsistent names. There will probably be more > templates coming, both bundled with Pyramid and separate. ChrisM has > said he doesn't like conditional templates (i.e., templates with > questions), but they've worked well in Pylons and they would allow a > streamlining of the current and future templates. > > The current application templates are: > > * pyramid_starter: BFG style (traversal, imperative) > > * pyramid_starter_zcml: BFG style (traversal, ZCML) > > * pyramid_zodb: BFG style (traversal, ZCML, ZODB) > > * pyramid_alchemy: BFG style (traversal, SQLAlchemy, ? configuration style) > > * pyramid_routesalchemy: primitive Pylons style (URL dispatch + > SQLAlchemy only) > > * pylons_minimal: Pylons "View handler" style minimal (with Mako?) > > * pylons_basic: full Pylons "View handler" style with Mako, no db > > * pylons_sqla: full Pylons "view handler" style with Mako, with SQLAlchemy > > I'd like to see one template equivalent to the Pylons 1 template, with > questions for SQLAlchemy and the template engine. The templates are > pretty straightforward even with the conditionals. Looking forward, > we'll also need questions for auth and ZODB. (Yes, some apps may want > both SQLAlchemy and ZODB.) > > The "pylons_minimal" template is rarely, if ever, used in Pylons 1. Do > we need it? > > "pyramid_routesalchemy" can maybe go away because it will just confuse > people. Or can it be renamed to something "minimal" or combined with > "pylons_minimal"? > > The "pylons_" names are a legacy from Pylons 2. Would it be OK to > rename these "pyramid_" and rename the current "pyramid_" ones to > something else? BFG beginners are generally more advanced than Pylons > beginners, right? Then it would be easier for them to choose the right > application template no matter what it's called. Either that or we > could name them all "pyramid_", or name the BFG ones > "pyramid_traversal_". > > I think we need to avoid "pylons" (without suffix) as a template name, > both because we're identifiying it with Pylons 1, and because there'd > be an entry point conflict if both Pyramid and Pylons are installed. > (Who knows which one you'd get?) > > So this all gets into, what do you call the super Pylons template with > questions? "pyramid" would be a nice name. Then delete pylons_basic > and pylons_sqla because it would supercede them, and pylons_minimal > because who needs it, and pyramid_routesalchemy for the same reason. > Then the other pyramid_ ones can stay as they are or be renamed > pyramid_traversal_. (The latter would group them together so that > people can remember, "If I want a BFG or TurboGears style app, use > "pyramid_traversal_".) > > -- > Mike Orr <sluggos...@gmail.com> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "pylons-devel" group. > To post to this group, send email to pylons-de...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > pylons-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-devel?hl=en. > > -- Alex | twitter.com/alexconrad -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-de...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-devel?hl=en.
