Michael Foord wrote: > Brett Cannon wrote: > >>On 10/12/06, *Anthony Baxter* <anthony at interlink.com.au >><mailto:anthony at interlink.com.au>> wrote: >> >> On Friday 13 October 2006 05:30, Georg Brandl wrote: >> > I'm I the only one who feels that the website is a big workflow >> problem? >> >> Assuming you meant "Am I", then I absolutely agree with you. >> >> >>I have touched the web site since the Pyramid switch and thus am not >>that active, so what I am about to say may be slightly off, but ... >> >>I know AMK was experimenting with rest2web as a possible way to do the >>web site. > > +1 for rest2web ;-) > > >>There has also been talk about trying out another system. But I also >>know some people would rather put the effort into improving Pyramid. >> > > Actually from the little I looked at it, pyramid seemed a very good > system. Particularly the SVN integration. > The real problem is the more or less complete lack of incremental rebuild, which does make site generation time-consuming. The advantage of pyramid implementation was the regularisation of the site data. I think we probably need to look at taking the now more-or-less regular data structures used to drive pyramid and find some way to use them (still with source control, but hopefully with much less verbiage) to drive something like Django. To retain the advantages of source control this might mean using scripts to generate database content from SVN-controlled data files. Or something [waves hands vaguely and steps back hopefully]. regards Steve -- Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC/Ltd http://www.holdenweb.com Skype: holdenweb http://holdenweb.blogspot.com Recent Ramblings http://del.icio.us/steve.holden
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4