On Wed, 2009-07-22 at 14:50 -0700, Ben Bangert wrote: > On Jul 22, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Mike Orr wrote: > > > If we find some great compatible feature, it can go into Pylons 1.1. > > If we find some great incompatible feature, it can go into Pylons > > 2.0. > > But what would these features be? We don't know at this time, > > otherwise we'd be putting them into Pylons 0.x now. "Finished" does > > not mean that no features can ever be added, it just means that 1.0 > > is > > done and there's nothing on the todo list. It also means that > > people > > can use it in production knowing that a new version isn't going to > > make them upgrade right away. > > > > Pypes has a vision larger than Pylons. It aims to support several > > framework front ends, potentially swallowing up other Python > > frameworks. If we called it Pylons 2.0, it would piss off the other > > frameworks and also cause user confusion, because Pylons means a > > certain application API. But we can call the Pylons flavor of Pypes > > "Pylons 2.0" if that makes people feel happier. > > > > There is one big thing we haven't decided yet, and that's Python 3. > > Maybe that will be "Pylons 2.0". > > > Mike hit it exactly on the head, I couldn't have said it better myself. :) > > > The components of Pylons are rather small, but I definitely don't want > people to feel there is stagnation. Phil Jenvey has been very busy > lately getting our Jython support up to snuff, and Pylons is now an > option under Glassfish, soon to be in the main branch: > http://blogs.sun.com/Jacobkessler/entry/construct_additional_pylons > > > I have some improvements and minor re-factoring planned for Routes, to > make it easier to add routes under a 'prefix', which will pave the way > in the future for better ways to plug-in sub-apps, as well as make it > easier to write up nested resources. Pylons is still awaiting some > re-factoring and fix-ups to its @validate decorator, and the > beaker_cache needs to be updated, and I'd love to get a template in > with some better Babel setup. > > > The list isn't all that large at the moment, but there's definitely > more on the plate for Pylons which will bring us out to Pylons 1.1, > 1.2, etc. I'd really hate for people to feel that Pylons is > 'finished', it isn't, there's definitely more coming.
Ok, that's good news, but guys *you need to tell us these things*! Where are these announced? Where is the news? Where are they on the roadmap? Where are the posts on the almost silent dev mailing list? Why is it so ridiculously hard to find out what's up with the future of Pylons? Yes, we can look at the tickets, but most evaluating users will not dig that far. It's just a plain uncomfortable truth, if more effort is not put into making it clear that stuff is happening, then saying that "Pylons 1.0 will be done that's it" is going to scare away potential users who think they're getting into another TurboGears 1 situation. TG1 is also claimed to be done and supported, but come on, no one is using it anymore who didn't start a project ages ago on it. One of the first concerns of new people is "is this really an active project? what's going on? will it be around in a year after I've put months into learning the project and converting my work to this framework? will I be able to convince clients that I'm not using something they will be stuck with" IMHO the public face of Pylons needs to do a lot more to give the impression that Pylons is active and continuing and not going to become abandon-ware. There are people out there interested in helping with this, but when we make some noise about it and it gets almost no response from anyone, it's very discouraging to us re the future viability of basing work on Pylons. iain > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
