Re: [flask] Flask-Actions
- From:
- YoungKing
- Date:
- 2010-10-21 @ 15:29
Hi,gunicorn support has been added, and also other servers like:
- appengine
- flup
- paste
- cherrypy
- twisted
- gevent
- eventlet
- tornado
- fapws
- diesel
- meinheld
- eurasia
- rocket
You can take a look at the documention to see the usage,
http://packages.python.org/Flask-Actions/
The uwsgi and mod_wsgi are neither written by python nor provided python
api,so I can't do anything about them.
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 8:52 PM, Stephane Wirtel <stephane@wirtel.be> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Yes, of course, Flask-Actions is very ambiguous, because I thought to a new
> extension
> as the flask-principal extension and not a deployment script.
>
> About Flask-Actions, there are missing configurations for uwsgi, gunicorn
> and apache with mod-wsgi.
>
> About Flask-Script and it's not very important but the 'help' screen is not
> very friendly,
> Could you improve the rendering of the help ? I'm not sure, but I think you
> use the argparse library
> and the basic layout is very nice.
>
> For the bpython option could be added as an option, I'm totally agree with
> you for this point.
>
> About the Flask-Admin, is it possible to change the default structure of
> the generated Flask Application ?
>
> Stéphane
>
> On 09/27/2010 01:31 PM, Dan Jacob wrote:
> > Flask-Actions seems to consist mainly of various deployment commands.
> >
> > However, it uses the werkzeug.script library, which Armin is planning
> > to rewrite/deprecate (this is the main reason I avoided it, following
> > discussion at the start of the Flask-Script project, that plus the
> > somewhat awkward syntax for defining actions).
> >
> > The easiest thing would be to keep the projects separate (I think the
> > name Flask-Servers or Flask-Deploy might be better than Flask-Actions,
> > which is somewhat ambiguous) but to use Flask-Script Commands for
> > defining the deployment commands instead. I'd like to keep
> > Flask-Script as slim as possible, but easy enough to extend into
> > different projects and extensions.
> >
> > The bpython option could be added as an option to the existing
> > Flask-Script shell command.
> >
> > On 27 September 2010 12:07, Stephane Wirtel <stephane@wirtel.be> wrote:
> >> Hi YoungKind and Dan,
> >>
> >> Could you discuss and propose a merge of your projects (flask-scripts
> and flask-actions) ?
> >>
> >> Thank you so much,
> >>
> >> Stéphane
> >>
> >>
> >> On 09/21/2010 04:30 AM, YoungKing wrote:
> >>> Yes,it should be ..,but I think the implements of flask-script is a
> >>> little more complicated than mine.
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:58 AM, Ron DuPlain <ron.duplain@gmail.com
> >>> <mailto:ron.duplain@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 12:04 PM, YoungKing <yanckin@gmail.com
> >>> <mailto:yanckin@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>> > I've released Flask-Actions
> >>> >
(http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Flask-Actions/).Please<http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Flask-Actions/%29.Please>
> >>> <http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Flask-Actions/%29.Please> review this
> >>> extension.
> >>> >
> >>> > Documention: http://packages.python.org/Flask-Actions/
> >>> > Sourcecode: http://bitbucket.org/youngking/flask-actions
> >>> >
> >>> > I knew that I appeared to have done some repetitive work as
> >>> Flask-Script,but
> >>> > I didn't mean to it.
> >>> > I had used some werkzeug scripts before,so I wanted to migrate
> >>> them to the
> >>> > flask,this is my original intention of this project.
> >>>
> >>> Documentation looks good, source looks clean, and the package looks
> >>> useful. As you say, it does look very similar to Flask-Script, and
> >>> imho this should be merged into Flask-Script.
> >>>
> >>> -Ron
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Blog : http://blog.flyzen.com
> >>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/wayhome
> >>> douban: http://www.douban.com/people/wayhome/
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
--
Blog : http://blog.flyzen.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/wayhome
douban: http://www.douban.com/people/wayhome/
Re: [flask] Flask-Actions
- From:
- Dan Jacob
- Date:
- 2010-09-27 @ 13:18
> About Flask-Actions, there are missing configurations for uwsgi,
gunicorn and apache with mod-wsgi.
That's up to the author to fix. Personally, I'm not sure it's so easy
to do - server side configuration tends to depend on a lot of
fine-tuning according to local requirements, so I'm not sure how much
work this saves. Day to day deployment (i.e. deploy from repo to live
site, run tests, restart server processes etc) is already handled
quite well by Fabric.
> About Flask-Script and it's not very important but the 'help' screen is
not very friendly,
> Could you improve the rendering of the help ? I'm not sure, but I think
you use the argparse library
> and the basic layout is very nice.
Could you give some idea of how you would want it to look ?
>
> For the bpython option could be added as an option, I'm totally agree
with you for this point.
>
> About the Flask-Admin, is it possible to change the default structure of
the generated Flask Application ?
>
What Flask-Admin ?
> Stéphane
>
> On 09/27/2010 01:31 PM, Dan Jacob wrote:
>> Flask-Actions seems to consist mainly of various deployment commands.
>>
>> However, it uses the werkzeug.script library, which Armin is planning
>> to rewrite/deprecate (this is the main reason I avoided it, following
>> discussion at the start of the Flask-Script project, that plus the
>> somewhat awkward syntax for defining actions).
>>
>> The easiest thing would be to keep the projects separate (I think the
>> name Flask-Servers or Flask-Deploy might be better than Flask-Actions,
>> which is somewhat ambiguous) but to use Flask-Script Commands for
>> defining the deployment commands instead. I'd like to keep
>> Flask-Script as slim as possible, but easy enough to extend into
>> different projects and extensions.
>>
>> The bpython option could be added as an option to the existing
>> Flask-Script shell command.
>>
>> On 27 September 2010 12:07, Stephane Wirtel <stephane@wirtel.be> wrote:
>>> Hi YoungKind and Dan,
>>>
>>> Could you discuss and propose a merge of your projects (flask-scripts
and flask-actions) ?
>>>
>>> Thank you so much,
>>>
>>> Stéphane
>>>
>>>
>>> On 09/21/2010 04:30 AM, YoungKing wrote:
>>>> Yes,it should be ..,but I think the implements of flask-script is a
>>>> little more complicated than mine.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:58 AM, Ron DuPlain <ron.duplain@gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:ron.duplain@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 12:04 PM, YoungKing <yanckin@gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:yanckin@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> > I've released Flask-Actions
>>>> > (http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Flask-Actions/).Please
>>>> <http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Flask-Actions/%29.Please> review this
>>>> extension.
>>>> >
>>>> > Documention: http://packages.python.org/Flask-Actions/
>>>> > Sourcecode: http://bitbucket.org/youngking/flask-actions
>>>> >
>>>> > I knew that I appeared to have done some repetitive work as
>>>> Flask-Script,but
>>>> > I didn't mean to it.
>>>> > I had used some werkzeug scripts before,so I wanted to migrate
>>>> them to the
>>>> > flask,this is my original intention of this project.
>>>>
>>>> Documentation looks good, source looks clean, and the package looks
>>>> useful. As you say, it does look very similar to Flask-Script, and
>>>> imho this should be merged into Flask-Script.
>>>>
>>>> -Ron
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Blog : http://blog.flyzen.com
>>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/wayhome
>>>> douban: http://www.douban.com/people/wayhome/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
Re: [flask] Flask-Actions
- From:
- Stephane Wirtel
- Date:
- 2010-09-27 @ 14:37
On 09/27/2010 03:18 PM, Dan Jacob wrote:
>> About Flask-Actions, there are missing configurations for uwsgi,
gunicorn and apache with mod-wsgi.
>
> That's up to the author to fix. Personally, I'm not sure it's so easy
> to do - server side configuration tends to depend on a lot of
> fine-tuning according to local requirements, so I'm not sure how much
> work this saves. Day to day deployment (i.e. deploy from repo to live
> site, run tests, restart server processes etc) is already handled
> quite well by Fabric.
>
>> About Flask-Script and it's not very important but the 'help' screen is
not very friendly,
>> Could you improve the rendering of the help ? I'm not sure, but I think
you use the argparse library
>> and the basic layout is very nice.
>
> Could you give some idea of how you would want it to look ?
A small example.
In this case, you see the usage, the options, the description of the main
script (but in the case of flask-script, we can have a short description
for each command, very useful),
you can show some examples.
stephane@universe ~> rails --help
Usage:
rails new APP_PATH [options]
Options:
-G, [--skip-git] # Skip Git ignores and keeps
[--dev] # Setup the application with Gemfile
pointing to your Rails checkout
-m, [--template=TEMPLATE] # Path to an application template (can be a
filesystem path or URL)
-b, [--builder=BUILDER] # Path to an application builder (can be a
filesystem path or URL)
[--edge] # Setup the application with Gemfile
pointing to Rails repository
[--skip-gemfile] # Don't create a Gemfile
-d, [--database=DATABASE] # Preconfigure for selected database
(options: mysql/oracle/postgresql/sqlite3/frontbase/ibm_db)
# Default: sqlite3
-O, [--skip-active-record] # Skip Active Record files
-r, [--ruby=PATH] # Path to the Ruby binary of your choice
# Default: /usr/bin/ruby1.8
-J, [--skip-prototype] # Skip Prototype files
-T, [--skip-test-unit] # Skip Test::Unit files
Runtime options:
-f, [--force] # Overwrite files that already exist
-s, [--skip] # Skip files that already exist
-p, [--pretend] # Run but do not make any changes
-q, [--quiet] # Supress status output
Rails options:
-h, [--help] # Show this help message and quit
-v, [--version] # Show Rails version number and quit
Description:
The 'rails new' command creates a new Rails application with a default
directory structure and configuration at the path you specify.
Example:
rails new ~/Code/Ruby/weblog
This generates a skeletal Rails installation in ~/Code/Ruby/weblog.
See the README in the newly created application to get going.
>
>>
>> For the bpython option could be added as an option, I'm totally agree
with you for this point.
>>
>> About the Flask-Admin, is it possible to change the default structure
of the generated Flask Application ?
>>
>
> What Flask-Admin ?
flask_admin.py is a part of Flask-Actions, it allows to create a skeleton
of a Flask App.
the question was for YoungKind ;-) sorry
thanks
Re: [flask] Flask-Actions
- From:
- YoungKing
- Date:
- 2010-09-27 @ 17:20
to Dan:
I din't know that werkzeug.script will be deprecated.If it happens ,I'll
consider to use flask.script instead in my future versions.I named my
project as flask-actions just follow the habit of werkzeug.script.
to Stephane :
I had changed the structure of generated Flask Application in my new
release http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Flask-Actions/0.5.2.
Just follow this article `lager application patterns <
http://flask.pocoo.org/docs/patterns/packages/>_ `.
Or can you give me an example of flask skeleton?
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 10:37 PM, Stephane Wirtel <stephane@wirtel.be>wrote:
> On 09/27/2010 03:18 PM, Dan Jacob wrote:
> >> About Flask-Actions, there are missing configurations for uwsgi,
> gunicorn and apache with mod-wsgi.
> >
> > That's up to the author to fix. Personally, I'm not sure it's so easy
> > to do - server side configuration tends to depend on a lot of
> > fine-tuning according to local requirements, so I'm not sure how much
> > work this saves. Day to day deployment (i.e. deploy from repo to live
> > site, run tests, restart server processes etc) is already handled
> > quite well by Fabric.
> >
> >> About Flask-Script and it's not very important but the 'help' screen is
> not very friendly,
> >> Could you improve the rendering of the help ? I'm not sure, but I think
> you use the argparse library
> >> and the basic layout is very nice.
> >
> > Could you give some idea of how you would want it to look ?
>
> A small example.
>
> In this case, you see the usage, the options, the description of the main
> script (but in the case of flask-script, we can have a short description for
> each command, very useful),
> you can show some examples.
>
>
> stephane@universe ~> rails --help
> Usage:
> rails new APP_PATH [options]
>
> Options:
> -G, [--skip-git] # Skip Git ignores and keeps
> [--dev] # Setup the application with Gemfile pointing
> to your Rails checkout
> -m, [--template=TEMPLATE] # Path to an application template (can be a
> filesystem path or URL)
> -b, [--builder=BUILDER] # Path to an application builder (can be a
> filesystem path or URL)
> [--edge] # Setup the application with Gemfile pointing
> to Rails repository
> [--skip-gemfile] # Don't create a Gemfile
> -d, [--database=DATABASE] # Preconfigure for selected database (options:
> mysql/oracle/postgresql/sqlite3/frontbase/ibm_db)
> # Default: sqlite3
> -O, [--skip-active-record] # Skip Active Record files
> -r, [--ruby=PATH] # Path to the Ruby binary of your choice
> # Default: /usr/bin/ruby1.8
> -J, [--skip-prototype] # Skip Prototype files
> -T, [--skip-test-unit] # Skip Test::Unit files
>
> Runtime options:
> -f, [--force] # Overwrite files that already exist
> -s, [--skip] # Skip files that already exist
> -p, [--pretend] # Run but do not make any changes
> -q, [--quiet] # Supress status output
>
> Rails options:
> -h, [--help] # Show this help message and quit
> -v, [--version] # Show Rails version number and quit
>
> Description:
> The 'rails new' command creates a new Rails application with a default
> directory structure and configuration at the path you specify.
>
> Example:
> rails new ~/Code/Ruby/weblog
>
> This generates a skeletal Rails installation in ~/Code/Ruby/weblog.
> See the README in the newly created application to get going.
>
>
> >
> >>
> >> For the bpython option could be added as an option, I'm totally agree
> with you for this point.
> >>
> >> About the Flask-Admin, is it possible to change the default structure of
> the generated Flask Application ?
> >>
> >
> > What Flask-Admin ?
> flask_admin.py is a part of Flask-Actions, it allows to create a skeleton
> of a Flask App.
> the question was for YoungKind ;-) sorry
>
> thanks
>
--
Blog : http://blog.flyzen.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/wayhome
douban: http://www.douban.com/people/wayhome/
Re: [flask] Flask-Actions
- From:
- Dan Jacob
- Date:
- 2010-09-27 @ 17:25
On 27 September 2010 18:20, YoungKing <yanckin@gmail.com> wrote:
> to Dan:
>
> I din't know that werkzeug.script will be deprecated.
I don't know if it will be completely deprecated, but it's likely to
be rewritten and I don't think people were too happy with the syntax.
I therefore decided to go with a fresh approach rather than have to
redo work later.