> Flexibility has diluted the main appeal of TG - simplified WEB development. > > When I started with TG1 there was only 1 set of documentation so there > was no way to get derailed by the subtle differences between branches. > Assuming 1.0 docs would work in 2.0 or 2.1 is problematic. > > The original 20 minute wiki was a great tutorial and got me started > very fast. Now, TG demos almost work, but you probably need to google for > answers to get all the details to actually work. > > I want to leverage the expertise of you developers wrt/ > best current practices. I don't want to become an expert > in a dozen different opensource packages in order to use TG; > The 80/20 rule applies -- if I stick to commonly used features > I should not need to be an expert in that package. > TG actually shines in this area, but it is not obvious. You really have > to dig to find all the value. > > All these branches causes confusion for users and makes people > think TG is not really stable. IMO, optimize for new projects > in TG 2.2. Optimizing for TG1 porting is not nearly as important. > I do not think there is a market for 1.5 or 2.0 (2.1 was clearly > making 2.0 obsolete before most people had a chance to look into it.)
I'm still using tg1 with sqlobject and plan to port my app to tg 1.5 once it's stable. Already tried a beta but things didn't work straight away (no surprise, it's a beta) and didn't have time to report my problems in details. But I'm definitely looking forward to a 1.5 release! > There are so many extensions and widgets and tools that it is not > usually obvious what feature/package to use. Build out the core of > SO, genshi, tw2, etc. so rapid prototyping is a reality again, > like it was in TG1. Moving on the next bleeding edge gizmo before > the masses have deployed the last one is the definition of instability. > > I am still planning to move my TG1 project to 2.1 but my day job > gets in the way. I suspect it will be way easier now because > work-in-progress back then is done now, and the docs have been updated. > > > thanks, > Andy > > - >> TurboGears has a good history. It's one of the older web frameworks in the >> Python world, and it managed to have a decent following for a long time. >> You can see that by looking at the history of the >> message counts for this ML. They're over at >> http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears-trunk/about >> >> The strongest period of time on the list was from Nov 2008 to Mar 2009. >> Ironically, Mar 2009 was when I first started looking at TurboGears. I'm >> not sure what happened, but traffic on the ML took a >> major dive that month. From there, a slow but steady decline is visible. >> In fact, most of 2010 shows traffic to be at an all time low, with May not >> even having a single post. >> >> My ultimate goal is to fix that. I want TG to become what it once was in >> popularity. I want to make TG into something people look at and say "Wow". >> As it stands right now, we're a long way from that. >> We can fix that, though. To that end, here's my current plan: >> >> First: Complete the migration from the current server onto >> beta.turbogears.org <http://beta.turbogears.org>. Move the live tickets >> into SF.net's Allure platform. Give us a new face, and start using >> our own product. >> Second: Release 2.0.4. We have some bug fixes in place already, we just >> have to complete any remaining tickets and do the release. >> Third: Release 2.1.1. Same deal, we just have to complete the mandatory >> minimum tickets for it. >> >> I hope to have *all* of that done by the end of April. >> >> Once we've accomplished that, it's time to begin working towards 2.2.0. >> This is where the work will become difficult. I have a number of goals for >> 2.2.0. >> >> * Bring testing coverage to 100% >> * Improve documentation. Overall goal is to make docs into a book in a >> few major parts: Tutorial (take a project from idea to maintenance), >> alternatives and extensions (to help get projects >> moving quickly), and finally a reference section at the end. >> * Close out all bugs that can be closed without introducing backward >> incompatibility *or* deprecation warnings. >> * New features will be limited to things that don't introduce backward >> incompatibility *or* deprecation warnings >> >> I want to release 2.2.0 by the end of this year. Between now and then, I >> plan to release incremental improvements to 2.1, so that we can enjoy the >> benefits of the progress. I'm hoping that these >> releases will help to bring TG2 back onto the radar for python web >> developers. >> >> So, there you have it. That's my goals and plans. What do you all think? >> >> -- >> Michael J. Pedersen >> My IM IDs: Jabber/[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>, ICQ/103345809, AIM/pedermj022171 >> Yahoo/pedermj2002, MSN/[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TurboGears Trunk" 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/turbogears-trunk?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TurboGears Trunk" 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/turbogears-trunk?hl=en. > > -- Psss, psss, put it down! - http://www.cafepress.com/putitdown -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears Trunk" 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/turbogears-trunk?hl=en.
