In the end the GAE SDK is a python module. We could just have a web2py
admin button to download the latest one form the official repository.
On Mar 17, 6:38 pm, Albert Abril wrote:
> What about implements it as a plugin as Jonathan said?
> It's a good idea and we don't have to download the extra
What about implements it as a plugin as Jonathan said?
It's a good idea and we don't have to download the extra 7Mb.
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 12:35 AM, Massimo Di Pierro <
massimo.dipie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is an excellent point.
>
> On Mar 17, 4:33 pm, howesc wrote:
> > I use GAE a lot,
This is an excellent point.
On Mar 17, 4:33 pm, howesc wrote:
> I use GAE a lot, and the thing that worries me about bundling with web2py is
> that when GAE updates they detect that your dev_appserver.py and appcfg.py
> are running an out of date version. so far they don't stop you from running
I use GAE a lot, and the thing that worries me about bundling with web2py is
that when GAE updates they detect that your dev_appserver.py and appcfg.py
are running an out of date version. so far they don't stop you from running
the old version but they could. I would not want web2py to be brok
On this topic I am happy to go with the wisdom and overview of more
experienced developers of this GREAT framework.
The debates in these forums are excellent learning.
My main hiccup with GAE has been the use of bigtable for images and document
storage.
Thanks to ( a few ) excellent posts and sl
I also lean towards GAE being separate. I'm already a bit nervous on what
the impact is of GAE support in the core framework.
Hi,
I am new to web2py and have chosen it for the gae support. Obviously for
someone like me building in the sdk would be very handy.
However, there are obvious disadvantages too (size and release cycles are
2):
Just wondering if instead of bundling the whole sdk into web2py the admin
controller
On Mar 16, 2011, at 7:09 PM, Kevin Ivarsen wrote:
> I'm biased in that I don't do any GAE development, but even though it's
> "only" 7MB, it seems like a big jump relative to the size of the current code
> base. If you exclude the "examples" directory under applications, the web2py
> source tree
I'm biased in that I don't do any GAE development, but even though it's
"only" 7MB, it seems like a big jump relative to the size of the current
code base. If you exclude the "examples" directory under applications, the
web2py source tree comes in at about 5 megs. I really like the lightweight
If the user does not download the full SDK, we would not be supporting
all the GAE functions (for example I removed the bulk upload APIs).
Basically we would include dev_appserver and ability to deploy. We
would have to upgrade when/if it breaks.
On Mar 16, 6:36 pm, Martín Mulone wrote:
> +1. No
10 matches
Mail list logo
