expo/expoweb
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://expo.survex.com/repositories/expoweb/.git/ synced 2025-12-08 23:04:35 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

django description updates

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Philip Sargent
2025-01-28 16:47:59 +00:00
parent 8ecdf37d10
commit aeb9f00a20
2 changed files with 9 additions and 1 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

3
handbook/troggle/trogdesign.html
View File

@@ -118,7 +118,8 @@ the maintenance is difficult because several different epochs of software techni
So this makes future enhancement slower and more difficult as historic special cases need to be re-done.
This is technical debt.
<p>We import <b>cavers' names</b> in three separate places: the folk list, the names of the surveyors in
survex files, and the names of expoers in the logbooks. These are inconsistently validated.
survex files, and the names of expoers in the logbooks. <strike>These are inconsistently validated.</strike>
These now all use the same code.
<strike>
<p>We have half a dozen different <b>logbook HTML dialects</b> for different eras of expo logbooks. These should be

7
handbook/troggle/trogsimpler.html
View File

@@ -162,6 +162,12 @@ fail to keep up with the rest of the world. Right now we need to get ourselves o
so that we can use an LTS release which has current security updates. This is
<a href="https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/3.0/internals/release-process/#supported-versions-policy">more urgent for django</a> than for Linux. In Ubuntu terms we are on 18.04 LTS (Debian 10) which has no free maintenance updates from 2023. <span style="color:red">We should plan to migrate troggle from django to another framework in about 2025. See stroggle below.</span>]
</em>
<p indent=20px>[ UPDATE Jan.2025: Django is still in
<a href=https://medium.com/@simeon.emanuilov/is-django-still-relevant-in-2024-1e68d2b13408">rude health</a>,
and showing no signs of slackening support: "a user base of approximately 42,094 customers and a 32.80%
<a href="https://6sense.com/tech/web-framework/django-market-share">market share</a>, Django leads, outpacing frameworks like Ruby on Rails... This data suggests not just survival but a thriving ecosystem." and
"Django’s commitment to backwards compatibility has been a significant advantage". It seems that Django may have decades ahead of it. It is more likely that we will want to move for other reasons: such are rebuilding everything on top of a map-based platform, not because Django becomes unsupportable.
We are curently running Django 5.1 on Ubuntu 24.04 in development and it is fine. Database rebuilds are now 40 <em>seconds</em> on modern hardware.
</div>
Things this [Rad's] solution doesn't solve:
<ul>
@@ -179,6 +185,7 @@ a matter of urgency. No one should have to imagine where the path to a file will
We need a file uploading system to put things in the right place; and this would help photos too.]
</em>
</div>
<p>[ Update Jan.2025 The cave description editing is now much improved, simplified and documented with Martin's photo-uploading and online HTML-editing capabilities added a couple of years ago.]
</div>