On 1/7/07, Stephen F. Steiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 7, 2007, at 7:10 PM, Mike Orr wrote: On 1/7/07, Stephen F. Steiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Mike Orr wrote: Webware knocked Zope off the throne, CherryPy knocked Webware (with help from Quixote), TG knocked CherryPy, Django and TG are neck-in-neck now, who knows who will be top dog next year? I'm not sure I'd agree about TG knocking out CherryPy. It's built on CherryPy so ipso facto, there's nothing in TG that can't be built on CherryPy. I meant in terms of popularity and visibility, not capability. It's possible my impression is wrong in any case; I'm just going by how often I hear of them. Mike, I completely agree with your popularity and visibility evaluation. It's amazing what a little well-executed publicity can do; well-planned or not.
Publicity plus having newbie-handholding tools ready to go. These are related because the works-out-of-the-box thing is what a lot of users are looking for, and it's what makes them advocate the framework to their friends. Down the road we should also think about having a generic database viewer, control panel app, and CMS ready to go, along with a full-featured blog and wiki (MoinMoin integration?). Other frameworks have some of these and they draw a certain percentage of users. They could be in a Super-Pylons-with-Batteries distribution that easy_installs them and sets up some demonstration app(s). Again, we're speaking in the context of frameworks for newbies, which is where all the "high visibility" framework hype is (or at least has been). The Quixote developers consciously chose not to compete in this arena and to stick to the niche it's best at: seasoned Python programmers who want a minimal framework with maximal flexibility. Pylons is getting advanced Python programmers for the same reason. Pylons has the potential to reach both markets. TurboGears has also reached into the maximum-flexibility market in recent months, so it's possible TG and Pylons will meet each other halfway, coming from opposite directions. It remains to be seen whether TG will still have a monolithic CherryPy base at that point, or whether CherryPy itself will still be as monolithic (I haven't seen CP 3). There has been experimental work to base TG on RhubarbTart, which provides a minimal CP-compatible request object and import-globals on top of a WSGI base.
I didn't realize how much a screen0-cast could convey; 'till I'd seen a few.
The problem with screencasts is they require proprietary codexes to view. These are a hassle to install on Linux. I had to watch the TG screencasts on my colleague's Macintosh. Whether you agree with free software or not, you've got a problem if your marketing materials can't be viewed by everybody with just a click. -- Mike Orr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
