SQLAlchemy and Genshi on TG1.0 or TG2?
Diego Búrigo Zacarão
I'm working on the development of Transifex[1] as my application[2] for the GSoC 2008 and I'm very undecided about the subject cited.
We've been migrating Transifex to use SQLAlchemy, Genshi with i18n support and ToscaWidgets on TG1.0. All seems to work fine until now. That was a part of my GSoC application.
However, continuing implementing new features for Transifex on TG1.0 is not trivial. Specially as we are not using default components like SQLObject, kid template and the own TG1.0 widgets. So, as we already on a big change/migration of components, maybe we could think seriously in a TG2 migration. It could avoid another big change/migration later.
Also, another interesting point for us it's implementing too many Ajax features on our tool. That seems to be a promise feature in TG2. Implementing it on the current version of Transifex is not an easy thing to do. To be honest, I don't know if that worth.
My intend is to follow the tendency, but knowing how much safe it is right now.
So, I would like to ear some TG hackers about it. Please, could you give me your opinion?
How much unstable TG2 is for be used in Trasifex?
Do we should move to TG2? No? Why not?
Any thought about Ajax?
If you prefer, comment it at my blog post[3].
[1] http://transifex.org
[2] http://transifex.org/wiki/gsoc/usability_enhancements
[3] http://diegobz.net/2008/07/10/sqlalchemy-and-genshi-on-tg10-or-tg2/
Best regards.
--
Diego Búrigo Zacarão
Linux User #402589
USE SOFTWARE LIVRE
Dimitris Glezos
> Continuing implementing new features for Transifex on TG1.0 is not
> trivial. Specially as we are not using default components like SQLObject,
> kid template and the own TG1.0 widgets. So, as we already on a big
> change/migration of components, maybe we could think seriously in a TG2
> migration. It could avoid another big change/migration later.
So it's like we're using TG 1.8 right now. We've adopted the big
component changes (Genshi, SQLAlchemy, ToscaWidgets) but still use the
core TG1 code base.
Currently this is the best option we have. The migration from our
current setup to TG2 should be trivial, so we might want to leave it
until TG2 stabilizes. The most important reason to not do it now is
that TG2 is still not quite stable and not properly packaged. We
*could* branch a Tx codebase which works with TG2 but it's probably
too early (might cause more problems than solutions).
> Also, another interesting point for us it's implementing too many Ajax
> features on our tool. That seems to be a promise feature in TG2.
> Implementing it on the current version of Transifex is not an easy thing to
> do. To be honest, I don't know if that worth.
The way our controllers work probably allows for an easy transition to
AJAX. It shouldn't be hard at all to adopt, say, jQuery. For example,
the "Refresh" form on the Module Details page is pretty simple: it has
its own controller and URL. Having an AJAXy Refresh button doing an
async call to the controller should be simple.
Same applies for file uploads probably -- there should be existing
code chunk examples that do exactly this. In a more technical level,
the Upload file form/widget uploads the file and attaches it to the
session. Then, when the next page loads the file is already there.
Diego, could you maybe list the places you think we should AJAXify,
and see if a lightweight library like jQuery could do the job? There
are quite a few TG1 AJAX-enabled websites out there, so it shouldn't
be too hard to do with a good URL design (like we have :).
-d
--
Dimitris Glezos
Jabber ID: gle...@jabber.org, GPG: 0xA5A04C3B
http://dimitris.glezos.com/
"He who gives up functionality for ease of use
loses both and deserves neither." (Anonymous)
--