Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[DISCUSS] Should the base.handlers have their counterpart in extension.handlers? #173

Closed
echarles opened this issue Jan 15, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@echarles
Copy link
Member

While converting JupyerLab Server to a Server Extension, it has been pretty easy to implement class LabServerApp(ExtensionAppJinjaMixin, ExtensionApp)

This works fine without touching the handlers which are still the old classical flavor (not a ExtensionHandler). If we also want to have the handler as pure extension, there are a bunch of code to be duplicated: the base.handlers.py (APIHandler...) should be replicated in something like extensions.base_handler.py.

Do we want to go this way? Maybe the base.handlers.py could extend/reuse the extensions.base_handler.py?

@Zsailer
Copy link
Member

Zsailer commented Feb 4, 2020

See my comments in #174.

@echarles
Copy link
Member Author

echarles commented May 8, 2020

This question has been solved making the ExtensionApp a Mixin.

Closing.

@echarles echarles closed this as completed May 8, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants