On 11/09/2010 05:10 PM, Chris McDonough wrote: > On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 16:56 -0600, Tim Black wrote: >> On 11/09/2010 04:21 PM, Mike Orr wrote: >>> I think Ben has his heart set on the name Pyramid for the >>> Pylons-level framework, and is already making website design and >>> marking plans based on that. So the high-level framework can be called >>> TurboGears or something closer to Pyramid, but not Pyramid itself. >>> >>> However, there have long been requests for a batteries-included form >>> of Pylons. We have always referred people to TurboGears for that. But >>> with the merger (if TG agrees to join it), a tighter branding may be >>> more appropriate, like Pyramid Gears. That way there's an "official" >>> high-level framework, clearly integrated and not just stuck onto it >>> like a Christmas tree ornament, and then we'll look like a >>> full-service organization (good for marketing). But I don't want to >>> preclude other high-level frameworks with semi-affiliated status. >>> There are too many legitimate alternatives to exclude them, and the >>> Python-web landscape would be more unified and interoperable if more >>> of the frameworks were built on the Pyramid stack. >>> >>> "Paste Pyramid" and "WebOb Pyramid" are not really along the same >>> lines. Paste and WebOb are low-level utilities, while Pyramid is a >>> complete framework. Pyramid : PyramidGears is more like Debian : >>> Ubuntu, not GNU : "GNU/Linux" : Debian. >> Aha! My obsessive search for the best naming scheme is over: >> >> Pyramid : TurboPyramid >> >> That's perfect. It keeps the Pyramid brand, it respects the fact that >> TurboGears is the fast way to get started, > But is TurboGears the fast way to get started? I ask this because > currently TurboGears doesn't include any OOTB application functionality > in its core. I would like to find a CMS made out of TurboGears too, but TurboGears is not trying to be a CMS; rather, it's the pieces out of which someone could build a CMS if they want.
That said, the TurboGears admin interface DOES work out-of-the-box: "The TurboGears Admin comes configured out-of-the-box for use with the default quickstarted template model." See http://www.turbogears.org/2.1/docs/main/Extensions/Admin/index.html#using-adminconfig, which includes a screenshot. The admin interface is a model browser, which of course would not be a complete CMS admin interface. So this isn't quite true: > It provides a bunch of frameworky bits that someone can > glue together if they work hard to make an application. It has some > batteries but the batteries are still extremely low-level. ...because TurboGears does glue the frameworky bits into a working application that actually displays in the browser, though that application doesn't do much compared to the applications it expects you to create out of that foundation. > However, it's already pretty fast to get started in this same way using > plain-Pyramid. What will a nascent TurboPyramid offer above what > Pyramid does now? > > Does TurboGears/TurboPyramid want to be a "best of breed framework" > still or does it want to have application components? I think those questions are best left to be answered by Mark Ramm and others who are its core developers. > If it wants to have application components (like an admin UI, perhaps a > blogging tool, a user registration system), etc, I'd say "yes, > TurboPyramid is a fast way to get started". If not, I think it's just a > different way to get started. While having a different way to get > started would be fine, and TurboPyramid is not a horrible name for that, > it's unlikely I'd personally be helping on that effort unless it puts > some "pixels on the screen" in the form of application functionality. Although I'm sure this will not be seen as a good idea by some (because it might prejudice TurboGears toward blog functionality), maybe to help satisfy your concern, to encourage people to adopt TurboGears (because many sites/clients want a blog page somewhere as a core feature), and to give a good example of how to begin extending the quickstart template, TurboGears would be wise to make a very simple blog page (model/controller/view set under a separate sub-controller class/object in a Python egg that could be improved in the future--call it tgext.blog) as a default page in the quickstart template. That way people would see that in fact it is a working application--you can make blog posts in the admin pages, and they show up on the frontend under the "Blog" menu item. I think it would be smart to package up TurboGears' wiki tutorial in a similar fashion, and offer it as a discrete package included in the quickstart, or as a package that is optional but easy to install. Tim -- 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.
