I support community contributions but there still needs to be an "editor" or someone ultimately responsible for the changes.
On Jul 31, 11:27 am, VP <[email protected]> wrote: > I completely support these ideas. It seems the book is Massimo's > effort, not a community's effort. Documentation needs to be a > community effort; look at Django, Drupal. > > On Jul 30, 11:03 pm, Bruno Rocha <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I completelly agree with Jonathan, I also want to have a deeper explanation > > on DAL backgrounds. > > > web2py is Agile enough for me and for my development team, but, sometimes we > > spent more time trying to figure out "how to" to some things, and testing > > alternatives than developing real solutions. > > > The book is very good when we need to solve common and trivial things, > > otherwise when we need to go further. The only solution has been testing, > > looking for examples, using this list, or in many cases reading the source > > code and trying to understand what is happening behind the scenes. It costs > > a great time. > > > As was mentioned in the "why I hate Django" video, using frameworks you gain > > time in the early stages, but lost much more in that we need to refine and > > tune up applications. > > > For this reason I support a forum <pyforum.org>, IMHO, until we have a > > broader and deeper documentation, a forum would be much more usable than > > this list, and the DRY concept could be applied more easily to posts in a > > forum, rather than messages in this list. > > Forum can do things like a good search engine, sintax highlighting, > > screenshots embeded in to the context.... > > and yet it is possible to create mechanisms for threads to be followed by > > email, and people could start new threads by email as well. Perhaps using > > markmin syntax to include files, highlight the code, and things ... more > > > This type of platform could be better used to build further documentation. > > > why not support and start an official web2py forum? > > > 2010/7/30 Jonathan Lundell <[email protected]> > > > > On Jul 30, 2010, at 7:22 PM, Iceberg wrote: > > > > > On Jul 31, 1:15 am, Jonathan Lundell <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Jul 30, 2010, at 9:19 AM, VP wrote: > > > >>> On Jul 30, 9:35 am, mdipierro <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >http://gluonframework.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/web2py-and-metaclasses/ > > > > >>> This is really nice. Please do more of this. > > > > >> My initial reaction is the opposite. The result might be more readable, > > > but it doesn't strike me as more writable. > > > > >> What would be most helpful for me would be a deeper explanation (in the > > > book) of what's going on behind the existing DAL "magic" syntax, rather > > > than > > > adding yet another layer of magic. > > > > > You make a good point, Jonathan. And I think there is a underlying > > > > question here. Which kind of audience is web2py targeting to? If for > > > > developers, the existing DAL syntax is already powerful and magical > > > > enough (the document is also good, here it is. > > >http://web2py.com/book/default/chapter/06 > > > > ). Developers don't need another layer which is more fancy but not > > > > more powerful. > > > > I'm not satisfied with the treatment in the book. I'd like to see each of > > > the DAL objects more completely described, especially as to the underlying > > > Python types and the operations that they implicitly support. Several of > > > them IIRC are polymorphic wrt their argument types, and you either have to > > > divine this telepathically or read the source in detail. Likewise operator > > > overloading. > > > > I'm sure it's second nature to Massimo, but for most of us, we have to > > > hunt > > > around for an example that matches our situation, and blindly copy & > > > paste. > > > Either that or experiment until it stops raising exceptions.... > > > -- > > >http://rochacbruno.com.br
