Amen, brother!

Sent from a phone, please excuse the brevity.

On 01.02.2012, at 09:03, Rob Miller <[email protected]> wrote:

> These are reasonable points to make. But Pyramid is explicitly not trying to 
> be the same thing that either Django or Rails is trying to be. Those are what 
> we call "opinionated" frameworks, which make things easier on less 
> experienced developers by making many choices for them. This usually comes at 
> a cost; you lose flexibility, and you have to wrestle w/ the framework when 
> you realize that the choice you want to make isn't in fact the one your tool 
> has made.
> 
> Pyramid has some opinions, sure, but far fewer of them. It's intended to 
> strike the right balance between flexibility, performance, and ease of use 
> for more experienced developers. Some people complain about certain features 
> b/c "I'm never gonna need this, and it confuses me, can't we just rip it 
> out?" But in every case that feature is there b/c SOMEone had to solve a hard 
> problem and that was the best way to do it. Ripping it out would make those 
> hard problems harder to solve. But Pyramid targets those hard problems, and 
> thus the features stay.
> 
> This case w/ globals is similar, although slightly inverted. In many cases 
> module-level global settings are fine; they make the developers life a little 
> bit easier, and they don't cause any problems. But in some cases they *do* 
> cause problems. Real, honest to god developer pain. Django and Pylons have 
> both hit this in the real world. For Django it's fine, it's a trade-off that 
> makes sense given their philosophy and their target audience. For Pyramid it 
> doesn't, b/c Pyramid is just as interested in reducing developer friction in 
> the hard cases as it is the easy cases, and so they make a different set of 
> trade-offs.
> 
> Does this mean that Pyramid will never be as widely used as Django? Probably. 
> Does that matter? Nope.
> 
> -r
> 
> On 1/31/12 8:16 PM, Jonathan Vanasco wrote:
>> my .02ยข is this:
>> 
>> App Developers like features like 'Globals'. It's something that is
>> familiar-from, and present-in many other frameworks.
>> 
>> Granted, pyramid is a low-level framework - and one that a more
>> 'webmonkey' friendly framework might be built upon itself. But those
>> frameworks are likely to end up implementing those features
>> themselves... both in bad ways, and in many numerous different ways. If
>> pyramid can find a way to pull it off correctly, it would be great.
>> 
>> Rails didn't succeed because it was a "great framework", its success is
>> largely do to it being usable-by and appealing-to really bad developers
>> ( i mean really awful ones ). PHP got to be ubiquitous and installed on
>> every platform, by just doing a shoddy job implementing everything, so
>> even the worst developers flocked to it. People I've been introduced to
>> by recruiters as "Top Django Pros!" commanding 160k salaries, have been
>> robots that barely know python.
>> 
>> I loved pylons, I love pyramid. I only get to code about 20% of my time,
>> and love being able to work in them, because they're implemented in a
>> way that really resonates with how I like to work. The problem though,
>> is that I'm usually running operations, tech or product at a company --
>> not implementing it. Having to source people to execute on goals is a pain.
>> 
>> I understand why "technically" some things might not be right or ideal,
>> and why they shouldn't be done -- but sometimes the best route for
>> adoption and continued health isn't to do the "right" thing.
>> 
>> sorry for ranting on this.
>> /j
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "pylons-discuss" group.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/pylons-discuss/-/ddSQnMKjZZ4J.
>> 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.
> 
> -- 
> 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.
> 

-- 
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.

Reply via email to