Whenever I am working on small projects, it seems like an overkill to
create an app usually with the same name as the website (and the project's
name with a small modification). For instance, if I am creating a project
for a small intranet application called Foo. I usually end up with a
structure like:

├── foo
│ ├── __init__.py
│ ├── models.py
│ ├── templates/
│ ├── tests.py
│ └── views.py
├── foosite
│ ├── __init__.py
│ ├── __init__.pyc
│ ├── settings.py
│ ├── settings.pyc
│ ├── urls.py
│ └── wsgi.py
└── manage.py

This seems quite redundant to me. Also foo contains all the assorted things
which cannot be reused anyway. Is there a simpler way to implement this? I
mean something similar to the original (pre-1.2?) structure of having
models, templates and views in the initial directory itself?

Otherwise can we explicitly create models, templates and views in foosite
itself and turn it into an app? I like this approach for smaller sites and
for functionality which cannot be abstracted into a separate app. Ideally I
would've preferred something flat, since "Flat is better than nested".

Would like to know the community's views on this? Any pros and cons would
be great too.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-users/24f6c34a-f387-4817-acad-907465c7af8e%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Search Discussions

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupdjango-users @
categoriesdjango, python
postedOct 29, '13 at 6:34a
activeOct 29, '13 at 6:34a

1 user in discussion

Trojactory: 1 post



site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase