On Jul 15, 4:30 pm, John H <[email protected]> wrote: > Now I find that they've actually release TG2 and that it is built on > Pylons.
Having used Pylons prior to the launch of the TurboGears2 project, I became curious about what TurboGears had to offer. The press from the Python Atlanta Conference (June 2007) regarding the collaboration between TurboGears and Pylons prompted me to explore the TurboGears 1 documentation and tutorials. Then I watched patiently through the slow grind of TurboGears2 progress. I was definitely looking forward to the functionality that Pylons would pick up through TurboGears. >From the start, the project was advertised as a re-write of TurboGears "on top of" Pylons. Mark Ramm was consistent throughout the project to distinguish TurboGears2 domains of concern from those concerns unique to Pylons. I have been impressed by Mark's technical abilities and his no-fear approach to re-writing TurboGears. Unfortunately, I have to agree with Chris that the end result is more like a bastardization of TG1 and Pylons. I hate what TurboGears2 did to Routes - it has been the sticking point in my efforts to work with TurboGears2. I finally gave up. At the same time, I feel the collaboration has made Pylons stronger. Several accommodations were made along the way to clean up Pylons and to increase cross-pollinization with other Python framework tools. Jinja2 (which captures much of what is good about Django) has been a delight to add to the Pylons templates. Regards, Bernie Pursley Simsbury, Ct --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
