Hello,
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Florent Aide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> TurboGears 2 team has chosen repoze.who to implement authentication
> and has spawned repoze.what to implement authorization.
That's their choice but that's not argument. What was reasoning behind that?
> I feel that
> repoze.{*} is quickly becoming a convergence point between our
> communities (zope, pylons, tg, and wsgi minded framework out there).
Really? repoze.who is inspired by zope but not used by zope!!! TG2 is
basically the same pylons (as Cream for Vim). And finally I don't know
other pure WSGI framework out there except Pylons. repoze.bfg says
they rely on WSGI but I don't feel it this way. Django is not using
repoze.who.
You shouldn't trust your feelings sometimes because there is no real
convergence point here. I personally see only Zope complexity added to
Pylons. Maybe some people can't live without that :-)
I will repeat my question: what additional value is created by
repoze.who what WSGI can't do?
--
Dalius
http://blog.sandbox.lt
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
