durusmail: qp: Twisted - Was: Re: Quixote, QP, the future...?
Twisted - Was: Re: Quixote, QP, the future...?
2006-04-09
2006-04-09
2006-04-10
2006-04-10
2006-04-10
2006-04-10
2006-04-10
2006-04-10
2006-04-10
2006-04-10
2006-04-10
2006-04-12
2006-04-12
2006-04-13
2006-04-13
2006-04-13
2006-04-13
2006-04-14
2006-04-14
2006-04-15
2006-04-16
2006-04-16
Twisted - Was: Re: Quixote, QP, the future...?
David Binger
2006-04-12
On Apr 12, 2006, at 3:09 AM, mario ruggier wrote:

> [comments on customizing the Site]

In my mind, the Site class captures all of the firm expectations
of your site management tool.  In a very real sense, it *is* the
site management tool.  The qp/bin script just gives it command
line operability.  The main difference between QP and Quixote
is that QP provides one firm set of decisions about how
sites are configured and arranged.  The QP Site class
implements this set of decisions.

If you are using a different Site class, you are using a
different command line tool.  I recognize that that might
be necessary for some people, but I don't see a compelling
reason for the qp/bin tool to try to dynamically adapt to every
possible situation.

Still, if you really must go this way, with only minor changes
in the Site class, you can change the Site import in a copy
of the bin/qp script, and there is a good chance your script
will work.











reply