Re: Django client

Hallöchen!

Bruce D'Arcus writes:

> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Torsten Bronger
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>> Might there be a way to design them in such a way that someone
>>> could later use a Django-native model instead (for those that
>>> don't want to install RefDB)?
>>
>> No.  I cannot -- and don't want to -- re-engineer the 1,000,000
>> LOC of RefDB.  On the contrary, the current plan is to have no
>> database models in the Django app at all.
>
> No, that's not what I'm saying (though reimplementing a good chunk
> of what RefDB does in Python/Django would require hundreds of
> lines; not a million).

Well, the million was a miscounting of Ohloh, in fact it's 150,000
lines.  Let the pure bibliography management be 20,000 lines in
Python.  This is pretty realistic.  And these are not "easy" 20,000
lines but nasty things like string-parsing, manipulating trees, and
implementing format converters.

> I was more just wondering if it'd be possible to leave room for
> others to do that later.

One can leave the interface to RefDB slim, then it could be
substituted by Django models.

But the better approach is to make more packages of RefDB, e.g. an
Ubuntu package.  The main shortcoming of RefDB on the long run are
import and export formats, which can be easily solved in the
frontend (Django in my case).  The rest just works, and there is no
need to reinvent it.

Tschö,
Torsten.

-- 
Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetus
                   Jabber ID: [email protected]


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA
-OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise
-Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation
-Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD
http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H