Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Thanks Shai for helping out with the documentation. He pushed a commit to Tom's branch and also left this work in progress: https://github.com/shaib/django/commit/f1877751df597f6f26fc90b01f32adee1893cf50. Yesterday, Tom told me he hoped he'd be able to put in some time on this on Sunday. I won

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Yes, that's my plan. On Saturday, September 16, 2017 at 2:20:00 AM UTC-4, Sjoerd Job Postmus wrote: > > Thank you Tim for all the hard work you have put into this! > > In your opinion, do you think it will be ready/merged before the big > freeze? > > On 16 Sep 2017 03:23, Tim Graham > wrote: > >

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Thank you Tim for all the hard work you have put into this!In your opinion, do you think it will be ready/merged before the big freeze?On 16 Sep 2017 03:23, Tim Graham wrote:Hi,Tom got sick and hasn't been able to work on the documentation as he'd hoped. If anyone wants to help, I left some TODOs

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi, Tom got sick and hasn't been able to work on the documentation as he'd hoped. If anyone wants to help, I left some TODOs (denoted by XXX) on the pull request: https://github.com/django/django/pull/9072. I'll be offline tomorrow morning (EDT) but I hope to resume work on it around 1700 UTC

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi all,I have not mentioned this so far in public channels. However, I will not really able to spend a lot of time on this PR for the upcoming days due to my son's birthday coming up this Saturday.I will keep an eye on the pull request and comments, and reply to the best of my ability.Thank you all

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Okay, I'll work on the patch and make it my top priority. On Wednesday, September 13, 2017 at 1:54:00 PM UTC-4, Claude Paroz wrote: > > >> Perhaps we can find a compromise to ship this feature in the alpha with >> minimal docs and complete the docs later? >> >> > I'm in favour. > > Claude > --

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

> > > Perhaps we can find a compromise to ship this feature in the alpha with > minimal docs and complete the docs later? > > I'm in favour. Claude -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To uns

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

2017-09-13 17:51 GMT+02:00 Tim Graham : > Given the patch's current state, I'm feeling a bit overwhelmed at the > prospect of reviewing it in a day or two. I didn't do a good job of > communicating this release cycle, but in the past, I've set a soft deadline > of two weeks before the alpha deadli

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Given the patch's current state, I'm feeling a bit overwhelmed at the prospect of reviewing it in a day or two. I didn't do a good job of communicating this release cycle, but in the past, I've set a soft deadline of two weeks before the alpha deadline for huge patches to be complete so that re

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

I've started to address some of the missing documentation aspects for this, here... https://github.com/django/django/pull/9072 I'll put in a bit more time tomorrow & friday and aim to make sure that it's reviewable by that point. It's a bit of a tough one to have to review right up against the a

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Is there any more documentation than https://github.com/django/django/pull/7542? It doesn't look very complete: * Release note are missing. * Documentation for url() shouldn't be removed -- as far as I know, there's no plan to deprecate it. It should be as valid alternative (i.e. error messages

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi all, Here a minor status update regarding the pull request, and a huge request. I believe the pull request is feature complete. Marten Kenbeek has proposed some changes to the code which I have accepted and merged into the original pull request. The pull request itself can be found at http

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi John, It's a bit unfortunate that I can't find any trace of your changes. They are probably on your local machine, so I can't see any of the changes you have made or the errors they cause. Do you believe the problems you are running into come from a bug in the path() implementation, not yet

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi All, My day job has gotten unexpectedly busy, and it seems I've taken on more than I can handle on the code side of things for this DEP. If someone else can help out, that would be great. I can provide some help with the documentation if it's still needed, though it seems like Tim's PR is pretty

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi Sjoerd, Emil (and everyone else), I wanted to give a quick update here so you all have some visibility into the progress being made. I have begun by working on the "Update the tests throughout, updating to the new style wherever possible." in Sjoerd's check list just to get my feet wet and famil

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

I think the review comments and the Todo list should get me off to a good start. I'm sure I'll have a few questions along the way as I've contributed to other open source projects before, but not Django. I spent some time last evening reading the contribution docs and getting my environment set up.

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

John: Awesome! Do you need anything to get started or is Sjoerd's review comments and todolist enough? On Friday, 28 July 2017 15:03:12 UTC+2, John Griebel wrote: > > Hi Sjoerd, > I too would love to see this feature in Django 2.0; in fact, I've been > following its progress quite closely. I wou

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi Sjoerd, I too would love to see this feature in Django 2.0; in fact, I've been following its progress quite closely. I would love to help out with it and have the necessary time to do so. John Griebel | Senior Backend Engineer | 3Blades.io | 814-227-4213 On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 5:06 PM, Sjoerd

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi all, Due to scheduling, I have not been able to give this the attention I would like to give it, and I don't see myself freeing up a significant amount of time to give it the final push forward before the feature freeze on September 18th. I did a final review of my changes. Though there are

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

On Wednesday, May 3, 2017 at 12:35:30 AM UTC+2, Marten Kenbeek wrote: > > > >> >>- The more complex part is (I think) figuring out how to deal with >>cases where we have a `path('/', include(other_urls))` and >>`other_urls` also has a `path()` mentioning `something`. However this >

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

> >- The more complex part is (I think) figuring out how to deal with >cases where we have a `path('/', include(other_urls))` and >`other_urls` also has a `path()` mentioning `something`. However this > might >just be my perfectionism and paranoia seeing edge-cases where ther

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

On Tuesday, May 2, 2017 at 2:18:27 PM UTC+2, Tom Christie wrote: > > > Some positive yes/no on whether or not this is an actual desirable > feature for Django from the core team. > > We've positive feedback from at least Jacob, Ola, Aymeric, and myself, so > I'd broadly assume we're good there,

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

> Some positive yes/no on whether or not this is an actual desirable feature for Django from the core team. We've positive feedback from at least Jacob, Ola, Aymeric, and myself, so I'd broadly assume we're good there, so long as there's not any specific blockers that emerge. I'd expect there

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi all, >From my personal perspective, I'd love to have that feature in Django. It'd make a significant difference especially for beginners learning Django, as I know that during Django Girls workshop, teaching newcomers regex is one of the most annoying and difficult parts of learning how Django

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

On Tuesday, May 2, 2017 at 7:39:06 AM UTC+2, Emil Stenström wrote: > > I talked to Sjoerd separately. He is also very busy at the moment, but was > working on getting merge conflicts resolved soon. He will also post a list > of things that are still missing, but spontaneously thought that this

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hello Emil, > On 2 May 2017, at 07:39, Emil Stenström wrote: > > What's missing now is someone from the core team that can help push this into > being ready for master. Is there someone that would like to be the hero for > everyone teaching django to beginners? :) Since I'm between two jobs,

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

On Monday, 1 May 2017 13:27:10 UTC+2, Tom Christie wrote: > > > I'm trusting that they ask for help if there's something the community > can do. > > Personally I've got other priorities at the moment, so it's not something > I'm working on or looking at. > I do think it's a really nice bit of low

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

> I'm trusting that they ask for help if there's something the community can do. Personally I've got other priorities at the moment, so it's not something I'm working on or looking at. I do think it's a really nice bit of low hanging fruit tho, just needs someone to do a bit of work on shepherd

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi everyone! I got curious to the current state of this work so I thought I save everyone some work and give you a bunch of links: - Main PR where the work is being done: https://github.com/django/django/pull/7482 - Seems there are conflicts with master that needs to be resolved. -

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Actually, we do something very similar to this in a routes.py for a flask app. Except instead of "pass" we call a function that has been imported. Paul *Flask* > Doesn't really have the idea of putting all your routes in one spot. So > pardon the silly example. > > > @app.route('articles/2003/'

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

I agree that those look odd. As far as the end-user is concerned, though, their project's urls module is the root. Does accepting (and removing) a leading slash have a negative side-effect that I'm not aware of? Enforcing its absence seems to expose an implementation detail. On Tuesday, 4 Octob

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

So I reformatted the markdown to rST, as required by the DEP process, and created a pull request. https://github.com/django/deps/pull/27 (And I see the first review is already in too!) On Monday, October 10, 2016 at 11:02:58 AM UTC+2, Tom Christie wrote: > > > What is the current status of this

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

> What is the current status of this pre-proposal? I think it's ready for some initial work to validate the approach. I've got some time available for this in the near future, given that I'm currently on open source work full time . > Is t

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

What is the current status of this pre-proposal? Is there anything I can help with? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

> an option could be to target this for inclusion in Django 2.0 but make the necessary fixes in Django 1.11 to allow this to exist as a third-party app in the meantime. Interesting idea, yup. I'm open minded at this stage. Other hurdles to get past first, so let's see how we go before calling a

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi Tom, I'm not sure how the timing will work out, but an option could be to target this for inclusion in Django 2.0 but make the necessary fixes in Django 1.11 to allow this to exist as a third-party app in the meantime. That would allow it some time to get some real world usage and undergo mo

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

On Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 1:30:38 PM UTC+2, MMeent wrote: > > It would shadow the stdlib os.path, albeit not as a library, but as a > function. > I do not think that os.path will usually interfer with url routing, so I don't take that as an argument. In the end, path is perfectly suitab

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi, I may be late, but using 'path' as a name for this function is in my opinion not recommended. It would shadow the stdlib os.path, albeit not as a library, but as a function. Using 'route' would be more interesting in my opinion, but shadowing the Channels 'route' function (which has a very si

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

That is *awesome* :) On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Tom Christie wrote: > > wondered if it'd be possible here to get rid of the converter in the > syntax at all, or have a default one if none is provided. > > Actually yes, I'd not noted in the proposal but you can also simply use eg. > > pa

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

> wondered if it'd be possible here to get rid of the converter in the syntax at all, or have a default one if none is provided. Actually yes, I'd not noted in the proposal but you can also simply use eg. path('users//') By default that'll give you the 'string' convertor. (Accepts any text

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

I'm quite excited about this: it's definitely gonna solve some of the pain points we're facing when teaching Django to Django Girls! Big +1 to include it in core. I recently started dabbling a bit in Rails, and wondered if it'd be possible here to get rid of the converter in the syntax at all, or

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hey All, Sorry all. I accidentally submitted my message somehow. I wanted to say that I like the direction Django is going compared to the other Python frameworks for its routing. I've looked at Express.js, angularjs, rails, and MVC.NET as well. And Django is definitely the easiest to read amo

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hey Tom, I really like your current implementation. I think it's an elegant solution to a complex problem, and I like that you looked at Flask for some inspiration. I thought that to round out the discussion I'd do a quick comparison to other frameworks. (I've added in slug examples): *Djang

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Just a short note from the one that started the first thread after finding the regexps hard to read: Thanks for this Tom, this is exactly what I was looking for! <3 On Monday, 3 October 2016 12:24:04 UTC+2, Tom Christie wrote: > > Hi folks, > > I wanted to push forward the consideration of intro

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

+1. Looks finished to me. I'd like to contribute on this one way or another. I'll try to make sure `django-simple-url` is as compatible with this as possible. If need be I'm willing to change the current license if it's not compatible with inclusion in Django core. On Wednesday, October 5, 2016

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

I've iterated on the pre-proposal, with what I think represents the best options to date. https://gist.github.com/tomchristie/cb388f0f6a0dec931c611775f32c5f98 The updates are: * Using a different name for the syntax: `path()`. * Dropping the leading slashes. * Simplifying the "unintended errors

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

In all fairness, it's actually magic_urlpatterns_you_will_never_see = path('/', include(the_urlconf)) Django uses the magic_urlpatterns_you_will_never_see, which already includes that slash. My recommendation would be to forgo the starting slash. In Flask you provide the full route ("absolute path"

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Yup, good points there. I wasn't really considering `include` at that point. Definitely some awkwardnesses that need thinking about there. urlpatterns = [ path('', homepage), path('users/', users_list) ] Looks very odd to me, since those are not actually valid URL paths. ('/' and '/user

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 09:21:33AM -0700, Tom Christie wrote: > > The only technical reason I see for enforcing the starting slash > > The leading slash in the syntax is open to discussion, however I'm very > strongly in favor due to two points: > > * It is a strong and consistent visual indicat

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

On Oct 4, 2016 15:53, ludovic coues wrote: > > > The question about the old routing system is about the plan to build > on top the old one. I'm not saying the old one is bad. But if we start > to build upon it, it will be harder to replace it. It might be more > interesting to refactor the routin

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

> About the url convention We're not changing anything about the URL conventions, we're changing the oath syntax. Django tends to use a trailing slash style by convention. This proposal wouldn't change that in any way. > The only technical reason I see for enforcing the starting slash The lead

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

On 04 Oct 2016, at 15:53, ludovic coues wrote: > Sorry about the way the question are formulated. Writing a rambling > post under emotion was pretty stupid of me. No worries. It happens :-) -- Aymeric. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django deve

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Sorry about the way the question are formulated. Writing a rambling post under emotion was pretty stupid of me. About the url convention, the DEP take a pretty strong stance, suggesting to raise an exception if the user don't use a convention which is different from the one in place. I don't recog

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hello Ludovic, On 04 Oct 2016, at 14:25, ludovic coues wrote: > I have a better DEP for you. > Introduce a dependency on django-simple-url. I don’t think we want to depend on a third party package for something as fundamental as URL dispatching. We can take good ideas and, if the license allow

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

In my opinion, there is too much question for this DEP. Here is a quick timeline. September 12, Emil Stenström rise a valid criticism, using regex for url routing is a bit too much in 99% of the case. It suggest a syntax similar to the ruby on rails routing syntax. September 13, someone mention sur

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Thanks for your update, Tom! 1. I think `route` is used in Django Channels (haven't looked it up. Not a real issue but something to think about). I'd prefer `path` instead. 2. Too much magic for my taste. I like the explicit name `typed_url` though (if we stick with `url` as opposed to `path` as

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

This looks like a useful addition. I'd also like to chip in with a DRY pattern I've been using in all my projects which might be worth considering. To take your example: def url_tree(regex, *urls): return url(regex, include(patterns('', *urls))) urlpatterns = [ > url_tree('articles/', >

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Some possibilities: 1. Use a different name for the new function. path('/users//') Actually `path` is pretty valid as a name there - that's *exactly* what it represents - the path portion of the URL. Alternately `route`? 2. Keep `url` for both styles, but with a really simple determination

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi, Am Tue, 4 Oct 2016 00:11:28 +0200 schrieb Markus Holtermann : > Thanks for the draft, Tom. I'm a bit concerned that the different > `url*()` functions you can import will become confusing. Can we have > `regex_url()` (with chim for `url()`) -- as proposed -- and > `simple_url()` instead? yes,

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi y'all, On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 08:15:45AM +0200, Aymeric Augustin wrote: I agree that different names would be better. I wouldn’t use the word “simple” since many “simple” things grow and become less simple in the long run. SOAP stands for Simple Object Access Protocol… For this reason url()

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hello, I agree that different names would be better. I wouldn’t use the word “simple” since many “simple” things grow and become less simple in the long run. SOAP stands for Simple Object Access Protocol… For this reason url() and regex_url() have my preference. I’m in favor of the order beca

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Thanks for the draft, Tom. I'm a bit concerned that the different `url*()` functions you can import will become confusing. Can we have `regex_url()` (with chim for `url()`) -- as proposed -- and `simple_url()` instead? /Markus On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 02:34:58PM -0700, Tom Christie wrote: Okay t

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Okay then, I've made some updates: * Updated the import design, in line with Jacob's suggestion. * Brief note on URL conventions, and the leading '/'. * Section on guarding against errors between `from django.conf.urls import url` and `from django.urls import url`. * Brief note on the internal Re

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Loving this work! There's one thing that Flask's routing syntax does that strikes me as backward, and it may be a good idea to consider reversing it: the converter indication. I suggest that rather than it being `` it should be ``, because the converter is very similar to a type, and we have t

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

+1 Tom’s proposal and Jacob’s comments. -- Aymeric. > On 03 Oct 2016, at 16:39, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > > Hi Tom - > > Thanks for putting this together! Overall, +1 from me as well: I've taught > Django to a bunch of beginners, and URLs are one of the major pain points. > I'd love to mak

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

> My suggestion is that we move towards `url()` giving "new style" patterns Agreed. I couldn't see a nice way around to do that, but moving the import to `from django.urls import url` sidesteps the issue nicely. Sounds good to me. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the G

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi Tom - Thanks for putting this together! Overall, +1 from me as well: I've taught Django to a bunch of beginners, and URLs are one of the major pain points. I'd love to make them easier, and your proposal looks pretty dang great. Some specific feedback: 1. I'm not too thrilled on the "is this

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

> There's text that elaborates on how to detect which one of the two options is implied. I'd recommend making that a section in and of itself. Probably a good plan, yup. I was somewhat writing that section as I thought, so it comes out a bit jumbled. I'm more confident in retrospect that regex

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi Tom, Nicely written DEP. I have some ideas/suggestions: - There's text that elaborates on how to detect which one of the two options is implied. I'd recommend making that a section in and of itself. - The DEP states that the new routing will be implemented in terms of the existing regex bas

DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi folks, I wanted to push forward the consideration of introducing a simpler URLs syntax, plus support for URL parameter type conversion. A pre-proposal is available here: https://gist.github.com/tomchristie/cb388f0f6a0dec931c611775f32c5f98 At this point I'm seeking feedback, before hopefully