Add larger app ex

[wgwz]

I chose the wrong base: #2130

Original PR message:

Addresses: #1902 (comment)

Confirms that the larger application as outlined in the docs, works as expected. For the sake of less confusion, for those working through this example, having src might be helpful. Not everyone will want to work along with the docs. If there are parts of the docs that are not clear, we should fix that as well. (They seemed clear to me).

Thiefmaster's response:

The weird commits in this PR aside (rebase to upstream/master and force-push to fix), I'm not sure how useful this is to have in the repo... Especially since having a "large" app without an app factory is somewhat questionable...

My response:

@ThiefMaster Sorry about that. I didn't choose correct base. I was thinking that in order to debug issues that people are having with code examples in the docs, it would be useful to have those examples on-hand.

I agree. But maybe until we can put something better together for #2027, this addition could just be temporary and we could deprecate this "larger applications" example at later time.

[untitaker]

This example doesn't work because it contains a circular import and precisely shows why you need app factories.

To separate views from the main app you should use blueprints.

[ThiefMaster]

I think it works since the views import is at the bottom, after app has been defined. Still a very good point though.

[untitaker]

Ah, I overread that this is from the docs, and yes, that actually works. I don't think we need to test this in any way though (I'd reserve examples/ for more "complete" applications, not just patterns).

[wgwz]

I'm not by any means saying this is best practice. Just that having the hardcoded example accompanying the docs, might lead to less confusion for those reading it. (And a sanity check that what's in the docs works as it should.)

@untitaker how would you feel about adding a patterns directory under examples?

[untitaker]

Fair enough though this doesn't test anything because pytest doesn't import the package. We should add a test stub as well that just imports and install the package in tox.ini.

[kblomqvist]

A week ago I got confused by circular imports when adding models.py to flaskr example that I was modifying to work as a large application. I think that the large app example should also showcase how to use models.

[untitaker]

Would like to see a rewrite of flaskr with flask-sqlalchemy

[wgwz]

While this PR isn't for flaskr and neither was the comment that prompted me to work on this, I do agree. flaskr could be overhauled to show current best practices; i.e. app factories, blueprints, flask-sqlalchemy and the CLI, which also helps with #2027. Maybe at that point this whole larger app portion of the docs can be written with respect to flaskr.

Fair enough though this doesn't test anything because pytest doesn't import the package. We should add a test stub as well that just imports and install the package in tox.ini.

@untitaker assuming you want to go forward with this, would tox.ini change as below? and what else needs to change/be added? I don't follow what you are saying. (not familiar with tox.)

commands =
    # We need to install those after Flask is installed.
    pip install -e examples/flaskr
    pip install -e examples/minitwit
    pip install -e examples/patterns/largerapp
    py.test --cov=flask --cov-report html []

[untitaker]

@wgwz Yes exactly, it's just about installing the application in the virtualenv (otherwise you can't import it in the tests)

[wgwz]

@untitaker OK I understand now. Should I add some basic tests for it under tests/test_apps?

[untitaker]

The other example apps had their own testfolders iirc

…

On 31 December 2016 17:53:14 CET, Kyle Lawlor ***@***.***> wrote: @untitaker OK I understand now. Should I add some basic tests for it under `tests/test_apps`? -- You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #2131 (comment)

-- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

[wgwz]

should this be closed?

[untitaker]

I think it's fine as is, thanks :)