We need to write a draft a roadmap. Alvaro has been saying this for
some time.
For me the priority is to strengthen web2py code and improve
documentation.
plugin_wiki is usable but we need more people to start using it before
we can finalize the its specs and until that is done I am not ready to
guarantee its backward compatibility.
T2,T3,etc. are all dead because they did not use any of the
gluon.tools stuff. plugin_wiki leverages on those insetad. It gets
installed at the app level so if will not broken by web2py upgrades.
It may be broken with plugin upgrades until we freeze the specs.
If I were you I'd use plugin_wiki by emebdding widgets in views with
{{=plugin_wiki.widget(name,**attributes)}}. Even if the syntax may
change a little the functionality is here to stay.
massimo
On Jul 21, 4:16 pm, Tim Michelsen <timmichel...@gmx-topmail.de> wrote:
> > What does the roadmap look like for
> > the future?
>
> Yes, that's exactly my question at the moment.
>
> I mean there were a numbert of attempts:
> t1, t2, c9, cube2py and now just plugin_wiki.
>
> How much is the core team dedicated to make this more that just a demo
> project?
>
> Web development at my company is shaping again as decisions seem to be made.
>
> So before I invest another bunch of hours in yet the next show-off tool?
>
> I tried to convert my self-programmed site into T9 now it tuens out to
> be a senseless effort.
>
> So a clear statement is needed.
>
> Because the video is definately HOT STUFF that deserves to be used.
> But for production employment I need a statement that ensures future
> upgradability just like web2py development ensures backward compatibility.
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Timmie
