[Grok-dev] Re: Working towards a 0.9 release
faassen at startifact.com
Tue Feb 27 12:25:32 EST 2007
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> It's time to start thinking and working towards a first release of grok.
> Looking at https://launchpad.net/grok/0.9/+specs, I can see that
> * Code-wise, we seem to be almost there, all the features were
> implemented but one: I've put the status of the grok-admin-ui to
> "started" instead of "implemented" as I don't know how complete the
> current implementation is in terms of our goals. I tried to comment this
> a little bit on
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/grok/+spec/grok-admin-ui, perhaps
> others can chime in and decide whether this is good enough for now or
> whether more needs to happen (and if so, what and who does it).
I've updated this text with my opinions. I think we're almost there for
0.9. We just need a way to:
* remove installed applications
* when you install an application with a name that is already in use,
get a sensible error message.
* provide a default index view for new applications created with
grokproject. Perhaps a grokproject task?
> * There are also two more items on the spec list that, by the way, don't
> seem to have an explicit target release set to 0.9. Let's pretend for
> now they're part of the 0.9 release anyway:
> simple-tutorial: something was started in doc/tutorial.txt. I see that
> a todolist example was chosen. I happened to choose the same
> example for the snow sprint and could pad things out here so that
> we have at least something. (It would look a lot like what I wrote
> for the screencast beta I did a while ago, see
I chose the todolist example based on your screencast. :) I changed my
mind however and went back to something similar to
doc/design/grok_beginner.txt, going through basic web programmer use
cases without an actual demo application.
Perhaps we can change it later, but writing a demo application which
goes through all these use cases may feel a bit contrived, and the demo
code is harder to read after all the setup.
> simple-website: I don't think it would be too hard to get a DNS entry
> for grok.zope.org and a really really simple website up and
Agreed, shouldn't be too hard.
> Then again, it should look at least a little pretty and
> feature our mascot in order to generate buzz.
> Do we want to punt on
> the website for 0.9 and just use CheeseShop or could we volunteer
> somebody yo come up with a simple design? I guess once we got a
> design we could all chip for the website contents (which could be
> generated from reStructuredText and be served statically for
> now...). Either way, we'll have to get a web site at *some* point,
> so we could just as well get started now.
I'm fine with punting and going for the cheeseshop for now. If someone
steps up and writes the content/design of a simple web page, I can help
getting it on grok.zope.org, however.
More information about the Grok-dev