On 07:41 am, p.may...@imperial.ac.uk wrote:
On 04/03/2014 00:52, Itamar Turner-Trauring wrote:
On 03/03/2014 01:09 PM, Adi Roiban wrote:
What do you think? Should I go ahead and add options as __init__
arguments or think of a configuration system?
A configuration system would take a while to
> A configuration system would take a while to design
This reads like: A configuration system will never be implemented.
I agree that for the time being we can implement current tickets using
__init__ arguments,
but why not try to implement something simple?
Example:
TWISTED_WEB_DEFAULT_CONFIGU
On 12:41 pm, a...@roiban.ro wrote:
A configuration system would take a while to design
This reads like: A configuration system will never be implemented.
I agree that for the time being we can implement current tickets using
__init__ arguments,
but why not try to implement something simple?
E
On 4 March 2014 15:22, wrote:
> The big downside of a "configuration object" is that "configuration" isn't
> any kind of abstraction. "Configuration" approximately means "stuff".
> Where does your "configuration" end? By just saying this is where
> "configuration" goes you've defined its scope
On Feb 27, 2014, at 10:39 AM, Daniel Sank wrote:
>>> Also, do you have any idea when the new documentation system will up and
>>> ready for contributions?
>>>
>> It's up and running; there should be a lot less need for documentation
>> (although
>> as you pointed out the current docs are wrong
