----- "Stephen John Smoogen" <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Luke Macken <lmacken@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > The future of Genshi is currently in question... > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears-trunk/t/ec921035779324e9 > > > > We currently rely on the Genshi templating engine for: > > > > * all static fedoraproject.org sites are compiled down to HTML > from Genshi > > * Elections > > * FAS > > * PackageDB > > * Smolt > > * Trac (which will be switching to Jinja2 in the next release) > > > > It's also worth noting that Bodhi & Mirrormanager still rely on Kid, > the unmaintained precursor to Genshi. > > > > Quoting upstream: > > > > """ > > Yes, my interests have mostly shifted elsewhere. I still believe > that both Babel and Genshi are worth being further maintained and > enhanced, and I'm still interested to actually do the work, but > obviously I'm not able to allot anywhere enough spare time to that > task right now. What's more, I've unforunately been unable to attract > other developers to contribute significantly to either code base, let > alone build a strong community. That's not to say that I consider > either project end-of-life. I still use them for my own stuff. But I'm > the pretty much the single point of failure for both projects, and > I've been failing badly and consistently at maintaining/enhancing them > for some time now. Sorry. > > > > I agree that adoption of Jinja2 should be considered, it's become a > very solid templating solution, and comes with both more momentum and > better performance than Genshi. But I'm not sure how a gradual > transition could work. As Noah said, you can't switch some of the most > important pages to Jinja and still support stream filters. Or site > templates using match templates for advanced customization. You'll > also need to rethink parts of the internationalization story, I > guess. > > > > If there's going to be another template engine switch, I think it's > going to hurt. But it might just be worth it. > > """ > > > > So, what are our options? > > > > 1) Find contributors that are willing and able to help sustain this > project upstream > > 2) Stay on Genshi and rely on the Fedora/EPEL maintainers to fix > bugs as they are filed > > 3) Try and utilize http://pypi.python.org/pypi/chameleon.genshi > instead, which is supposed to be able to run Genshi templates faster > than Genshi can. > > (Note: TG2 was going to support this engine, but apparently it > needs a bit more work. It may still be worth looking into, though.) > > 4) Port to another templating engine (Jinja2, Mako, etc) > > > > We obviously have a vested interest in keeping this project alive, > so #1 is ideal. > > > > Porting will require a bit of effort. The TurboGears2 port of bodhi > that I'm working on will use the Mako templating engine (which is > actively maintained by the SQLAlchemy author). However, it seems > we've taken the #2 route with Kid for the past 5 years, and I've had > zero issues with it. > > > > There was talk at PyCon this year about changing the TurboGears2 > default templating engine to Mako. The only reason not to for 2.0 was > to ease the 1.0->2.0 transition. However, everyone I spoke to was in > favor of switching the defaults in 2.1. > > Looking at the options and other parts.. I think staying with Genshi > for the most part would be our 'best' bet. If someone is really > motivated or if we are doing a huge code change in something then > maybe it would be attractive for changing. Yeah, I agree. This issue has caused a lot of discussion today, and there are definitely a lot of people out there that care about Genshi and some have even stepped up and are willing to help support & maintain it. I also see some milestone activity on my upstream tickets happening today. So, Genshi is definitely not dead -- it just needed a swift kick in the ass :) luke _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
