On Feb 14, 10:08 pm, Mike Orr <sluggos...@gmail.com> wrote: > Have you seen the pyramid_sqla package, which includes an application > template? It addresses these three.
Nope. Took a lot of combing to find. It was kind of hidden under some text on the Pyramid intro. Would be great to see that in another "tool tip" style text-treatment like the item above it. Will be going through it tonight. > When Pylons was created in 2005, every framework had to be "like > Rails" and "MVC" in order to succeed. Yet Django became the most-used > Python framework in spite of being MV rather than MVC. The main issue > for developers is ignorant managers who say "It must be Django" (or > Rails/PHP/Java) -- without knowing anything about these technologies, > just that these are the popular buzzwords. It's much less common to > hear "Must be MVC". For developers who can choose their own framework, > again they are swayed more by these Django/Rails/PHP/Java buzzwords > than by MVC. So Pyramid's most direct competitor nowadays is Django, > not MVC. I know that too well and can give a few perspectives: I took over as Acting CTO at TheDailyBeast.com a few months ago. My predecessor committed the org down a Rails path that I needed to finish up ( legacy on php ). Then we merged with Newsweek. I was in meetings with the rest of the management teams nonstop for months. When execs hear words like "typical/standard MVC" , its a few points in your favor. When there are words like "MV" or "just like Django" - it falls on deaf ears. I do A LOT of consulting with startups and ad agencies in the NYC area. 9/10 times they have a MVC framework or experience. it's not just Rails, but there's also: CakePHP, Symfony, CodeIgnighter, Kohana, etc. Django can look slightly alien to folks because of the paradigms it's chosen, but its also got some familiar elements. Pyramid has less of the familiar elements, because like Pylons its more for "power users" and "engineers" than webapp developers. Only 1/10 people I meet would even be interested in Pylons; for the rest - they're looking for familiar ground. > The developers went back and forth on this but in the end went with > single modules. i'd really suggest revisiting this. showing multiple files gives a clear idea and example how to scale. programmers looking at multiple files can more easily see how to collapse into a single file, than looking at a single and trying to figure out if there's any special stuff needed to use multiple files in the module. > This is also in the pyramid_sqla manual. rad. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en.
