I'm not an authority on the matter but I'll respond anyways. Note that
I will probably over generalize and water down things, and may be
plain wrong but it should help give you some idea anyways.
pyramid is basically a renamed repoze.bfg, which was a framework made
by the zope folks in an attempt
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Kevin J. Smith ke...@ryzoe.com wrote:
Hi,
Someone pointed out pyramids to me
(http://docs.pylonshq.com/pyramid/dev/narr/introduction.html) and I am a bit
confused with the relationship between pyramids and pylons. I have been
using pylons for over a year now
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 11:40 PM, Andrew Kou andrew@gmail.com wrote:
Whoa, so Pylons (the framework) is being killed off?
The framework named Pylons will remain 1.x, and will be used and
maintained for several years. The part of Pylons that is in the
``pylons`` package is actually pretty
had a quick look at pyramid ... too complex to me and not really
understand for which benefits, which could not be handled with the
lovely pylons ..
I feel should consider whether it's time for me to step back to
django .. I always hated zope (useless ?) complexity and I love simple
way of
On Nov 5, 5:34 am, daniel daniel...@orange.fr wrote:
had a quick look at pyramid ... too complex to me and not really
understand for which benefits, which could not be handled with the
lovely pylons ..
More specific criticism would be helpful.
I feel should consider whether it's time for me
On Nov 5, 5:44 am, chrism chr...@plope.com wrote:
I feel should consider whether it's time for me to step back to
django .. I always hated zope (useless ?) complexity and I love simple
way of thinking
I've spent ten years using Zope. Pyramid is not Zope. It does use
several packages in
so we did it...
import pylons
from pylons.controllers.util import Response
response_options = config['pylons.response_options']
request_counter = 1
while request_counter = MAX_REQUEST_TRIES:
try:
pylons_obj =
@Tim: apologies for huge delay in responding on this. Missed this when
first came through and only noticed this now when reading back threads
...
On 24 May 2010 10:05, Tim Black timbla...@gmail.com wrote:
On 05/23/2010 03:51 AM, Rufus Pollock wrote:
On 22 May 2010 21:25, Tim Black
No criticism at all, although it would be nice getting the relevant
user's benefits of the change. The complexity I talked about as well
the allergy to zope is a personal perception I would wish expressing
here (perhaps I'm the only one feeling that, then just don't care
about it)
I decided to
On Nov 5, 7:15 am, daniel daniel...@orange.fr wrote:
No criticism at all, although it would be nice getting the relevant
user's benefits of the change. The complexity I talked about as well
the allergy to zope is a personal perception I would wish expressing
here (perhaps I'm the only one
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 2:34 AM, daniel daniel...@orange.fr wrote:
had a quick look at pyramid ... too complex to me and not really
understand for which benefits, which could not be handled with the
lovely pylons ..
The Pyramid book is a reference manual so it contains all the details.
More
Can you point to some decent documentation on getting Sprox to work
with Pylons that doesn't require translating TG's implementation of
Pylons? It's been about 6 months since I tried to shove Sprox into my
Pylons app without a lot of success. I've only recently been digging
into Django, and I've
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Kevin,
On 4 Nov 2010, at 23:44, Kevin J. Smith wrote:
Someone pointed out pyramids to me (http://docs.pylonshq.com/pyramid/dev/narr/introduction.html
) and I am a bit confused with the relationship between pyramids and
pylons.
I have been
So as a user what matters to me is that I can still continue to:
1) use SQLAlchemy to fetch stuff
2) call some backend modules with that data
3) maybe store the results in Beaker
4) then send those results to Mako
I suspect this is probably going to be the case, so I'm cool.
Any
My $0.02 USD:
As a longtime Pylons classic (1.x) and sometimes Zope 3 user, I'm
intrigued by Pyramids.
A disclaimer: I was not fond of classical Zope 3 development. Since I
worked with a longtime Zope veteran (Jeff Shell), I know why Zope 3
was an architectural improvement over Zope 2. But the
Yeah, the main issue is that I think the new structure at a high level can
be a little confusing, since the Pylons name is changing from a framework to
a project. The distinction between Pylons 1.0 and Pylons project makes it
difficult to relay the Pylons name and the fact that Pyramid is a
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 9:24 AM, David Gardner dgard...@creatureshop.com wrote:
So as a user what matters to me is that I can still continue to:
1) use SQLAlchemy to fetch stuff
2) call some backend modules with that data
3) maybe store the results in Beaker
4) then send those results to Mako
Thanks for that very thorough dissertation of the state of the Pylons union!
I found it all a bit depressing, mind you, because I have chosen to build
our application on a technological dead end framework (Pylons 1.x) But if
there is some inherent architectural dead end to Pylons 1.x then I
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Eric Rasmussen ericrasmus...@gmail.com wrote:
This has been a fascinating discussion! I don't have anything to add that
hasn't already been expressed, but I second Kevin's request to try it out
and see how it works.
More specifically, to the developers: do you
On Nov 5, 2010, at 11:36 AM, Kevin J. Smith wrote:
I found it all a bit depressing, mind you, because I have chosen to build our
application on a technological dead end framework (Pylons 1.x) But if there
is some inherent architectural dead end to Pylons 1.x then I completely
understand
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 8:05 AM, Graham Higgins gjhigg...@googlemail.com wrote:
Kevin J Smith wrote:
From
the page on pyramids it seems to suggest that pylons post 1.0 will be using
pyramids? If so, statements like no controllers kind of frighten me ...
and quite frankly most things that are
As some may have noticed in the tweetsphere (or whatever the catchy term is for
that), a Pylons + repoze.bfg framework merger is under way. Some will be
shocked, sad, excited, etc. at this move. We wanted to have a good amount of
'support' under the new combined effort which was the main reason
Hi all,
Thanks to especially Graham and Mike to point out what the benefit for the
end-user-developer (a crude term, I know ;) ) will be with the
Pylons2/Pyramid move.
When I started to read these posts, I was a bit concerned, too. I (we, my
company) have been long time Pylons users, and
I've started wondering about porting a subset of Plone to Pyramid.
Pylons has long lacked a full-featured CMS package. While Plone can be
mounted as a sub-URL or vice-versa, it's still really big and
different and harder to extend. As a programmer I'd be interested in
making custom Plone products
On Nov 5, 3:55 pm, Mike Orr sluggos...@gmail.com wrote:
Less confrontation, Chris, please. Pylons users are legitimately
concerned about any sudden changes in the API, abandonment of
previously-supported versions, and over-Zopeification. Also, Pyramid
is being introduced to them in a haphazard
Hi Mike...I don't have much technical input on such a thing right now,
but we've been threatening to do this for a while:
http://lists.repoze.org/pipermail/cmf3k/
We've actually had two in-person sprints on it, but it's a large job and
not much was produced, at least not much that is very
On Nov 5, 2010, at 1:50 PM, Jens Hoffrichter wrote:
Thanks to especially Graham and Mike to point out what the benefit for the
end-user-developer (a crude term, I know ;) ) will be with the
Pylons2/Pyramid move.
When I started to read these posts, I was a bit concerned, too. I (we, my
Having a nearly-ready made CMS on top of Pylons would be the most amazing
thing likeever ;)
I have struggled too much with the shortcomings of PHP based CM systems over
the years (and I'm doing so right now, once more, with growing pains).
That much said, I would love to contribute something
28 matches
Mail list logo
