If your questions needs to be answered quickly, Django may be right choice. I think, you could have known why not to use PHP when you ask question on Django vs Pylons :-) .
I NEVER worked on Python at jobs. I wanted to create a website. I have chosen Pylons over Django due to its customization feature & luxuries. I have gathered small small frustration while working due to lack of documentation & community support. I am very thankful for people who helped me in some cases. I spend more time on Pylons. Now I don't have time & interest to learn another framework. I have to go with Pylons. All I would ask seniors/library developers of pylons to respond to the questions asked by newbies like me. Let the newcomers to feel good about using Pylons by heart. I REALLY don't understand what do you people mean by marketing Pylons. I tried to use authkit in my project, which is evil in my project life. I asked many questions here but got no reply. I do not expect such a thing from a matured community. Things are changing but very slowly. Sorry about my English. On Dec 7, 5:30 am, "Mike Orr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 10:39 AM, Ben Bangert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Dec 6, 2008, at 9:31 AM, zunzun wrote: > > >> Comparison before starting a project, used to decide which framework > >> to use. > >> Django: according tohttp://groups.google.com/group/django-users/about > >> Members 12,016 > >> Group Activity is High > >> Pylons: according tohttp://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss/about > >> Members: 1,748 > >> Group Activity is Low > > > Really? That's how you decide? Then I believe you *must* choose PHP. It > > completely dwarfs Django and Python altogether, its the only choice really > > if you want to determine framework based on user-base (popularity). :) > > Excellent answer. > > Pylons 0.9.7 is almost released, the main issue being finishing the > documentation. In the meantime, the Pylons Book is pretty complete > and covers the RC version. It's an axiom of open-source programming > that the last 10% of a release takes N months longer than anticipated. > N = 5 and counting for Pylons, and it has been > 12 for both Django > and Cheetah in the past. > > Django's popularity is mainly due to superior marketing and > documentation. They have a corporate backer and thus more people with > those skills. Pylons' developers are mainly hackers/web programmers, > who would rather build software than do marketing. So many people > have not heard about Pylons or its voice gets drowned out. But Pylons > has particular favor among those who like extremely modular tools, and > those people have been coming to us. > > An interesting question is, why did [any framework's] users choose it? > Django: > - technical capability: same as Pylons/TurboGears. Not a reason to > choose one over another. > - design philosophy: build our own tools so it's well integrated. > Some number of people like this. > - completeness of toolset: if you need CMS tools, there may be some > that are only available in Django and Plone currently. > - tutorials: "I read Django's docs and they were easy to > understand". A lot of people cite this. > - marketing: "It seems everybody's using Django." or "I didn't know > there were any other viable Python frameworks.": A lot of people say > this. > > Pylons: > - technical capability: the same. > - design philosophy: use 3rd-party tools when feasable, WSGI to the > core: many Pylons' enthusiasts come from this mindset. > - completeness of toolset: the basic stuff is all there and then some. > - tutorials: it takes a bit of work to find the relevant > documentation. For 0.9.7, the Pylons Book is your best bet right now. > For 0.9.6, the official docs are good. > - marketing: there will be a stronger marketing push after 0.9.7 is > released and the new website is finished. > > >> Guido van Rossum has blessed > >> Django here: > >>http://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2006/aug/07/guidointerview/ > > That was written two years ago. At the time Guido also hoped Django > and Pylons would merge. I don't think he understood the situation > very well at that point, because Django and Pylons can't merge without > one of them giving up its fundamental philosophy. And the ascent of > WSGI makes a merger less necessary: what's needed is interoperability. > Django has had a weakness on that point, but it's gradually getting > better as it moves closer to WSGI. In any case, Guido now understands > that multiple frameworks are here to stay (like multiple GUI > libraries), and each has its unique strengths. > > -- > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
