Dan, (and Gustaf) >> 1. nobody mentioned pyjamas (fixed!) >> 2. pyjamas isnt mentioned in this link found in the thread: >> http://wiki.python.org/moin/WebFrameworks
Pyjamas is mentioned in the Python wiki at http://wiki.python.org/moin/WebBrowserProgramming According to my understanding in the WebFrameworks article they list server-side technologies only. Maybe we could make it more clear in that article, make the "client-side technologies" stand out? > Last year I wrote a proposal for a pyjamas tutorial session at PyCon > 2011. It was turned down and the reasons given essentially confirmed > the low profile of the project. I believe that the "low profile" is at least partly due to the "sexiness" of a) our advertising material (i.e. the website), and b) the lacking quick results for front-end developers. I'm trying to work on fixing some usability basic of the site, so that people coming to Pyjamas stop (their legitimate) complaining that they don't find information, or that they have a hard time joining the mailing list, etc. So that's item a) from above. For b) we need to look at what the "competitors" get right, fix that, then we can play our USP, "with Pyjamas you can do the same thing in Python; with less or the same amount of code." I take three prominent, maybe the most appealing, UI-focused JS frameworks as an example: * jQueryUI (http://jqueryui.com/demos/) * ExtJS (http://www.sencha.com/products/extjs/examples/) * QooXDoo (http://qooxdoo.org/demo) GWT is ugly be default. We need to fix that by finding and offering themes off our project or website, maybe integrating a "Pyjamas default theme" in order to make sure that Pyjamas applications look sexy and are usable/acceptable for integration right from the start. (At the moment what we only have is recorded some experience of CSS hell in the wiki article.) Maybe Alexander Tsepkov (*huhuu!*) could provide some of his experience of what type of work it was to style Grafpad (www.grafpad.com) to make it look like what it is today, that would be nice. As soon as we have this fixed our online examples will look more sexy and attract more public interest. With the sample templates we ship with Pyjamas developers and project owners would have it easy to come up with their own style. <exaggerate> Everyone will be happy! </exaggerate> What we should strongly address too is automating the generation of Pyjamas sources from GWT (upgradablilty, if you want so). I have seen discussion about this, recently. ("leo does it with inline comments [...] so can we") I believe this would a) be challenging from a technical and organisational point of view, and b) give the project a sense of "solid ground" for facing future (as long as GWT is maintained by Google; history will prove when the finally kick it). Anyone else have a different opinion? Peter
