On 18-05-2015, Randy Syring wrote: > ------=_Part_793_1541699878.1431980742515 > Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="----=_Part_794_1959648491.1431980742515" > > ------=_Part_794_1959648491.1431980742515 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > I've always rolled my own frameworks, but as my company grows, I think it's > time to consider adopting a framework that already exists. I've typically > leaned towards Flask and friends in the past, but due to the way releases > are being handled, I'm shopping.
I was in the same situation with my own framework. With Pyramid i didn't throw away my framework. Instead i replace gradually each part of my framework with Pyramid equivalent. The flexibility of Pyramid is perfect for this. For good development decision I look at http://substanced.net It doesn't use sqlalchemy but it show some good practices. You don't need to worry about the long term support of Pyramid, the code is very clear, short and documented. In the worse case it will be possible to maintain it like your own framework (i found it more documented than my own home-framework !). If you don't see a lot of activity in the community it's because it just work. The stability of functionalities is a feature (my interpretation). Welcome ! -- William -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
