On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 11:04:12AM -0600, Ian Bicking wrote: -> From my perspective, it would be easy for Quixote development to open -> up in this way if it uses WSGI in a more core way. Which is why it -> seems like a natural directory for Quixote.
[ munch ] -> David pointed out the issue: "Our business has never been, -> and will probably never be, web framework development, or -> coordinating open source projects." And that would be fine if Quixote -> had a more "open" framework, and that doesn't have to mean -> everyone-edits-the-code, it can just mean giving people an architecture -> it is easy to plug in to. WSGI is one such architecture; notable since -> it's the only one that people are using in this way. Well, that and -> some stuff in Zope, but I'm guessing people here aren't thinking about -> moving to Zope. Let's see if I can keep this short... :) I, personally, find that Quixote+session2 does 100% of what I need it to do (perhaps modulo an ORM). With just this package, I can write PostgreSQL-backed Web sites; publish/traverse object hierarchies; and create essentially any site I need. Were I to want to mix and match functionality with WSGI, I would probably look for a few specific items -- caching, gzip, and URL mounters -- to tack on. Commentary-style functionality is about as complex as I think I'd ever want to get. It's *great* to know that I can do this with WSGI middleware. It's also very nice to know that should I ever abandon SCGI, I don't need to do anything at all to my application: I just need to find a new WSGI server. But *that's it*. Nothing more. Nada. Zip. Zilch. I have no other needs popping up on my radar screen. And, more to the point, I don't think I'm atypical. I want a bundled package. I want it simple, downloadable, installable, and straightforward. I don't want lots of configuration options. I don't need a choice between 5 different flavors of can openers, to mix metaphors. Paste leaves me out in the cold. It's too complicated to explain to most Python people, much less my mother (a smart woman). I don't want all that configurability. And I'd be willing to bet that 90% or more of Python Web programmers don't care much about that stuff, either. And I think this is also the problem with pushing componentized or WSGI-ized Web frameworks. It's not what people want, and it's probably not what most of them need. It's a nice *option* to have, but it's not bread'n'butter for Web programming. --titus the luddite _______________________________________________ Quixote-users mailing list [email protected] http://mail.mems-exchange.org/mailman/listinfo/quixote-users
