Hi Waldemar, So, we agreed, it's not a problem with django, it's problem with those 3rd-party apps. Perhaps, you can write emails to their authors now explaining your position?
Actually, it's not a problem that 70% of those apps are broken -- in other areas, the percent of "wrong" solutions can be up to 90-100% ;) On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Waldemar Kornewald <wkornew...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 10:32 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <ja...@jacobian.org> > wrote: >> There's no way I'm adding text like that to the staticfiles >> documentation. Not in a million years. It's confusing to me, and >> *I've* been following this discussion. Can you imagine how confusing >> that's going to be to people who *haven't*? The vast majority of users >> aren't going to know what the heck an "asset manager" is, what this >> "standards-complient" business is, or why they should care. They're >> reading this document because they want to get a CSS file up onto a >> production server somewhere. That's it. > > Why do you think was the patch named "ridiculous-patch.diff"? I'm > trying to communicate the *problem* because you haven't understood > that, yet. But for some reason you expect me to send the *solution* > (that's why you ask for a patch). That makes no sense at all because > you don't know what the *problem* is. > >> As far as I can understand from the vast reams you've written so far, >> what you're basically saying is "if you use url() in a CSS file it >> needs to point to an URL that actually exists." I'm pretty sure most >> people are smart enough to figure that out. > > No, you're looking at this from the wrong perspective. When people use > django.contrib.staticfiles then of course they will use URLs that > exist. Anything else is ridiculous. Why would anyone write URLs that > don't work? :) > > But is it so difficult to understand that a lot of developers use some > *other* asset manager? More than 70% of those other asset managers > *force* you to write *broken* URLs. Most asset managers are broken! > The problem is not staticfiles, but the large number of broken > 3rd-party asset managers. > > Why are they broken? Because they combine your files and once your > files are combined the URLs suddenly work. IOW, those asset managers > convert *broken* URLs into *working* URLs. That's their convention and > their standard. Is this stupid? Yes. It's still reality. A very large > number of developers use this stupid broken convention. > > Now what do you think, how likely is it that open-source developers > will use such a *broken* asset manager (not staticfiles) and release > *broken* CSS code that is *incompatible* with > django.contrib.staticfiles? It's far too likely for Django to ignore > this. > > This is the last time I try to explain this. As you said, let's just > wait for the first users to report a bug. I hope that then you'll > realize that Django's *3rd-party* asset managers have to be fixed, not > staticfiles. > > I'll do my part and at least convert django-mediagenerator to a > staticfiles-compatible URL scheme. > > Bye, > Waldemar > > -- > Django on App Engine, MongoDB, ...? Browser-side Python? It's open-source: > http://www.allbuttonspressed.com/blog/django > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en. > > -- Best regards, Yuri V. Baburov, ICQ# 99934676, Skype: yuri.baburov, MSN: bu...@live.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
