I know if I really understood Django I might get this but I've been
looking for days..
Then it also occurred to me that this could be another one of those
issues?
I notice that there are no styles applied to the basic examples in the
AEP, how should I go about putting pretty styles on to the base and
child pages??
I can't really find any real simple explanations in the Django docs
for this either...Maybe I just don't even get the basic vocabulary?
Wow I just read though quickly,, This is the deep end of the pool!
Further suggestions appreciated,, It seemed to me that his was a
missing element to Django, now I know that it was not just my
ignorance! Solutions n this area will help adoption in a major way.
Are ther any other resources suggesting solutions or tools in the
"normal" Django world?
On Apr 4, 10:37 pm, dartdog1 <tombran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wow I just read though quickly,, This is the deep end of the pool! > Further suggestions appreciated,, It seemed to me that his was a > missing element to Django, now I know that it was not just my > ignorance! Solutions n this area will help adoption in a major way. > Are ther any other resources suggesting solutions or tools in the > "normal" Django world?
I've seen other approaches, but none that provided a flexible API for compressing *and* combining media files in a generic way, so I decided to do it on my own.
Your solution for serving static media is really great.
But it deserves better documentation - with working code really
serving content and explaining screenshots for UNIX and Windows both.
Best solution is useless if a developer uncustomed to your ideas needs
a painful week of trial and error learning time before he can start
with.
And you should better link fom app-engine-patch code home to this
group (not to the 'Django Deverlopers' group where people are lost in
over 20,000 messages).
A third suggestion: Perhaps it's better to use the subject 'app engine
patch' (without dashes) that Google search associates your group with
appengine.
> I've seen other approaches, but none that provided a flexible API for
> compressing *and* combining media files in a generic way, so I decided
> to do it on my own.
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 9:21 AM, HolgerBerlin <w...@arcor.de> wrote:
> Your solution for serving static media is really great.
> But it deserves better documentation - with working code really > serving content and explaining screenshots for UNIX and Windows both.
Thanks. The problem is all those things are just too much for a single person to handle. Writing good documentation takes lots of time and it's hard to predict what questions our users will have. What exactly did you miss in the documentation?
> And you should better link fom app-engine-patch code home to this > group (not to the 'Django Deverlopers' group where people are lost in > over 20,000 messages).
There already is a link to this group on the project website (sidebar on the right). Where did I link to the Django devs group?
> A third suggestion: Perhaps it's better to use the subject 'app engine > patch' (without dashes) that Google search associates your group with > appengine.
Actually, Google indexes dashes such that you can enter appengine and "app engine" and "app-engine" and it will always match, so there's no need to do that. We simply don't have a very high page rank. ;)
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 9:21 AM, HolgerBerlin <w...@arcor.de> wrote:
> > Your solution for serving static media is really great.
> > But it deserves better documentation - with working code really
> > serving content and explaining screenshots for UNIX and Windows both.
> Thanks. The problem is all those things are just too much for a single
> person to handle. Writing good documentation takes lots of time and
> it's hard to predict what questions our users will have. What exactly
> did you miss in the documentation?
> > And you should better link fom app-engine-patch code home to this
> > group (not to the 'Django Deverlopers' group where people are lost in
> > over 20,000 messages).
> There already is a link to this group on the project website (sidebar
> on the right). Where did I link to the Django devs group?
> > A third suggestion: Perhaps it's better to use the subject 'app engine
> > patch' (without dashes) that Google search associates your group with
> > appengine.
> Actually, Google indexes dashes such that you can enter appengine and
> "app engine" and "app-engine" and it will always match, so there's no
> need to do that. We simply don't have a very high page rank. ;)
It's not a question of wrong or right, your docu is quite perfect, but
you are doing it the hard way, explaining word by words not visually
or by working demo code.
So a newbie has to do an hours work without a single misunderstanding,
without a single typing error. That's quite impossible. Sooner or
later most people give up.
But you are right. It's too much work for a single person. Perhaps
other users could post their experience or even write kind of
tutorial.
Anyway, something similar to you sample would be very helpful - a demo
with 1. a custom css file and 2. serving a simple picture to
demonstrate working code.
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 3:14 PM, HolgerBerlin <w...@arcor.de> wrote: > Anyway, it would be quite helpful, if you could provide a demo project > similar to your sample project - a demo 1. with a custom css file and > 2. serving a simple static picture, to demonstrate working code.
I'll add that to the sample project when I have some more time.
>> Where did I link to the Django devs group?
> Google search for 'app-engine-patch' offers > http://code.google.com/p/app-engine-patch/ > there do a search for 'discussion' which is linked to 'django- > developers' until now.
Did you read the text before "discussion"? It says: "Future plan: Native Django support", so the link leads to a discussion about native Django support. ;)
I agree with Holger's comments that summarizes my situation, so in the
absence of more complete examples I'm blundering around and asking
dumb questions which If I knew Django might be obvious,, But as I get
through this I hope to produce some documentation, if only by the
trail of messages but more likely on my blog,, maybe even a new one on
app engine,, I'm still not even sure that it is possible to really
build and operate a full featured blog on App-engine, it seems to me
if it were more people would have done it and be active about the
process??? What blogs I see seem to pretty well stop shortly after
implementation, not sure why.. but I'll admit mine has,(
http://tombrander.appspot.com, based on bloog) since I did not see any
"easy" way to add extensions..
A few more hints on adding the css to the main and child pages (and
Flatpages) in the current AEP example would be appreciated!!
On Apr 8, 9:49 am, HolgerBerlin <w...@arcor.de> wrote:
> > What exactly did you miss in the documentation?
> It's not a question of wrong or right, your docu is quite perfect, but
> you are doing it the hard way, explaining word by words not visually
> or by working demo code.
> So a newbie has to do an hours work without a single misunderstanding,
> without a single typing error. That's quite impossible. Sooner or
> later most people give up.
> But you are right. It's too much work for a single person. Perhaps
> other users could post their experience or even write kind of
> tutorial.
> Anyway, something similar to you sample would be very helpful - a demo
> with 1. a custom css file and 2. serving a simple picture to
> demonstrate working code.
> Did you read the text before "discussion"? It says: "Future plan:
> Native Django support", so the link leads to a discussion about native
> Django support. ;)
Maybe, but as a lot of people I'm used to find my way with Goole
search. As there is no prominent link to this group I take
http://code.google.com/p/app-engine-patch/ and search for a discussion link there, not reading details and not
scrolling down further.
I guess 'discussion group' is what most people are in search for. So
placing your 'groups' link not below general links but a little bit
higher and calling it something like 'Our Group' might be helpful.
Folder stat14Log contains screenshots explaining how the project was
created.
Folder stat14 contains the project itself. You only have to fill in
your AppName into app.yaml and can start it with manage.py runserver
or upload it with manage.py update.
As I read a minute ago Google has expanded its file size limit from
1MB to 10 MB. So my above zip doesn't need to be split up in four
parts. You can download the whole zip with the following link:
http://benchstat.appspot.com/fileHost/09/04/08/staticDemo.zip
Something even I can get!!
I am very grateful, doubt I would have gotten there on my own, your
work has made it much easier to understand the documentation.. I was
getting placements all wrong...
On Apr 8, 2:22 pm, Konrad Martin <konrad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As I read a minute ago Google has expanded its file size limit from
> 1MB to 10 MB. So my above zip doesn't need to be split up in four
> parts. You can download the whole zip with the following link:http://benchstat.appspot.com/fileHost/09/04/08/staticDemo.zip
Konrad,
I was able to follow your screen shots and after correcting a bunch of
typos finally have "style" on my opening page on the sample app. There
were several items in your screen shots (particularly the settings in
settings.py and paths for that.) that were not evident to me from the
doc. I completely missed the Combine operator... so I'm going back to
re read and then Maybe I'll take a crack at explaining it myself
Again thanks...
On Apr 8, 2:22 pm, Konrad Martin <konrad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As I read a minute ago Google has expanded its file size limit from
> 1MB to 10 MB. So my above zip doesn't need to be split up in four
> parts. You can download the whole zip with the following link:http://benchstat.appspot.com/fileHost/09/04/08/staticDemo.zip
On Apr 8, 12:13 pm, Waldemar Kornewald <wkornew...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, Google indexes dashes such that you can enter appengine and
> "app engine" and "app-engine" and it will always match, so there's no
> need to do that. We simply don't have a very high page rank. ;)
Hi Waldemar,
are you sure that's really just the page rank and nothing else?
Recently I did a Google search with 'groups Google app-engine-patch'.
I had bet this search produded a top link to your group.
But it didn't. First link was a link to app-engine-patch_Code (not
this group!).
Among the first 10 links there was no link to this group, indirect
references only - for example app-engine-patch group mentioned by
ohloh or by markmail. Next 10 links the same.
So I wonder if there might be some admin feature preventing the search
bot from indexing your site.
On Apr 8, 11:20 pm, dartdog1 <tombran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe I'll take a crack at explaining it myself
Hi tom,
maybe it would be helpful if we tried to exchange our code more in
form of working examples than by quoting only parts of it.
To zip a project and make it downloadable is quite easy.
As we are all in appengine most of us will dispose of several
appengine application names. Up to ten names are possible per account.
So you can use one appName as file host. It can take 1 GB data for
free with file size up to 10 MB each and 1 GB free traffic per day
even after may 2009.
You only have to keep in mind that your root folder 'myHostedFiles' is
working as a mirror. If you delete a file in its subfolders next
upload the file will be deleted on Google appspot servers too.
And when posting code in form of zipped projects obviously your code
shouldn't contain hard coded passwords.
Hi guys, first of all, thanks Konrad for providing a sample app. Would you and "dartdog1" like to write an article about the media generator?
I've now extended the sample project with our "jquery" app (adds jquery 1.3) and an empty look.css in the global media folder. Those files are also integrated in the base.html template.
Would you like to write an article about how to use jquery with the media generator? This would at least be a very practical application of the media generator.
I was going to ask Konrad If he would mind if I used his screen shots
on my Blog, where I usually document this sort of stuff, (happy to
provide links to elsewhere, like the code as well)
I'll also look at the New version.
Either way I'll probably be quiet for a few days as I have some paring
work to do that usually takes most of the weekend...
Best
On Apr 9, 4:25 am, Waldemar Kornewald <wkornew...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi guys,
> first of all, thanks Konrad for providing a sample app. Would you and
> "dartdog1" like to write an article about the media generator?
> I've now extended the sample project with our "jquery" app (adds
> jquery 1.3) and an empty look.css in the global media folder. Those
> files are also integrated in the base.html template.
> Would you like to write an article about how to use jquery with the
> media generator? This would at least be a very practical application
> of the media generator.
> Would you like to write an article about how to use jquery with the
> media generator?
Until recently I thought the media generator a great tool and jquery
another great tool but didn't see them linked since I didn't upload
jquery but took it (resource saving) directly from Google code
<script src="http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.3.1/ jquery.min.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
That's working quite fast as Google tries to get this file cached on
each client system.
Under these circumstances I would like to know, what is, to your
opinion, the advantage of uploading jquery with media generator
instead of loading jquery directly from Google code?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Konrad Martin <konrad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Waldemar,
>> Would you like to write an article about how to use jquery with the >> media generator?
> Until recently I thought the media generator a great tool and jquery > another great tool but didn't see them linked since I didn't upload > jquery but took it (resource saving) directly from Google code > <script src="http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.3.1/ > jquery.min.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
> That's working quite fast as Google tries to get this file cached on > each client system.
> Under these circumstances I would like to know, what is, to your > opinion, the advantage of uploading jquery with media generator > instead of loading jquery directly from Google code?
Well, one very important feature of the media generator is that you can *combine* your media. You'll certainly have more JavaScript code than just jquery itself, so you now have one request to Google for jquery and at least one more request for your custom code. The real problem here is that unless you somehow manage to implement cross-browser async loading of javascript files those individual files will block each other, so your custom code will not get fetched from the server until the jquery code has finished loading (google for blocking javascript). Your site should load faster if you combine your custom code with jquery directly into a single file and work around the whole blocking problem with this much simpler solution.
|
