Comments on: Django has the quid http://www.oluyede.org/blog/2008/11/23/django-has-the-quid/ Everything considered harmful Wed, 21 Dec 2011 07:59:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: Lawrence http://www.oluyede.org/blog/2008/11/23/django-has-the-quid/comment-page-1/#comment-55478 Lawrence Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:19:14 +0000 http://www.oluyede.org/blog/?p=372#comment-55478 <p>Exactly Ben, I understand the reason why Pylons exist obviously, the problem that I see in the long run is about the fragmentation. Turbogears had the same problem too. Stale documentation or 10 ways to do a tutorial because everybody used a different set of packages. Pylons is more linear in that way, fortunately.</p> <p>If the potential contributors are divided amongst different subprojects there's less concentration of people around the same problem. Just my consideration</p> Exactly Ben, I understand the reason why Pylons exist obviously, the problem that I see in the long run is about the fragmentation. Turbogears had the same problem too. Stale documentation or 10 ways to do a tutorial because everybody used a different set of packages. Pylons is more linear in that way, fortunately.

If the potential contributors are divided amongst different subprojects there’s less concentration of people around the same problem. Just my consideration

]]> By: Ben Bangert http://www.oluyede.org/blog/2008/11/23/django-has-the-quid/comment-page-1/#comment-55477 Ben Bangert Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:02:24 +0000 http://www.oluyede.org/blog/?p=372#comment-55477 <p>Yep, there's definitely differences in the communities, I think mainly as they both hit different sweet spots. There's going to be a lot more in common for the Django community by the nature of Django itself. Just like there's a strong Plone community, strong Joomla community, strong Drupal community, etc. You have a large group of people making sites that generally are fairly close in core functionality.</p> <p>I'd consider the Pylons community fairly strong as well, but definitely a different feel to it as the range of problems people are using it for seems a bit more varied. With Django, 98% of those using it will be using functions it provides such as its ORM, its templates, contrib modules it comes with (which all come with a set of assumptions about how the site works), etc. These things mean that most Django (certainly not all though) will be very similar in many ways.</p> <p>Pylons projects can deviate heavily from one another, which means you can't have all this re-use between members in the community, as most of them make fairly different assumptions. But some core aspects are definitely picking up steam, for example FormAlchemy has come a long ways and makes it a snap to generate forms from SQLAlchemy models.</p> <p>They'll always have different communities, as they address different ways of solving the problems at hand which generally appeals to different groups of developers.</p> Yep, there’s definitely differences in the communities, I think mainly as they both hit different sweet spots. There’s going to be a lot more in common for the Django community by the nature of Django itself. Just like there’s a strong Plone community, strong Joomla community, strong Drupal community, etc. You have a large group of people making sites that generally are fairly close in core functionality.

I’d consider the Pylons community fairly strong as well, but definitely a different feel to it as the range of problems people are using it for seems a bit more varied. With Django, 98% of those using it will be using functions it provides such as its ORM, its templates, contrib modules it comes with (which all come with a set of assumptions about how the site works), etc. These things mean that most Django (certainly not all though) will be very similar in many ways.

Pylons projects can deviate heavily from one another, which means you can’t have all this re-use between members in the community, as most of them make fairly different assumptions. But some core aspects are definitely picking up steam, for example FormAlchemy has come a long ways and makes it a snap to generate forms from SQLAlchemy models.

They’ll always have different communities, as they address different ways of solving the problems at hand which generally appeals to different groups of developers.

]]> By: Lawrence http://www.oluyede.org/blog/2008/11/23/django-has-the-quid/comment-page-1/#comment-55475 Lawrence Sun, 23 Nov 2008 16:52:07 +0000 http://www.oluyede.org/blog/?p=372#comment-55475 <p>Arthur: I am sure of that, despite the fact that I think fragmentation isn't always a good thing</p> Arthur: I am sure of that, despite the fact that I think fragmentation isn’t always a good thing

]]> By: Arthur http://www.oluyede.org/blog/2008/11/23/django-has-the-quid/comment-page-1/#comment-55474 Arthur Sun, 23 Nov 2008 16:16:41 +0000 http://www.oluyede.org/blog/?p=372#comment-55474 <p>You might also want to take a look at web2py and Glashammer. Both are also very interesting frameworks.</p> You might also want to take a look at web2py and Glashammer. Both are also very interesting frameworks.

]]>