This has already been discussed around an year ago, both in person, on HangOut and many other ways, and we came to an agreement that didn't prevent anyone from doing his own TurboGears like scaffold on Pyramid, it just didn't have to be called TurboGears. Orion was the suggested name at the time.
Now I don't see any point in bringing it up again, especially considering that the 2.3 pylons less branch has been already under development for 6 months, is now able to serve TurboGears applications three times faster without any required change, works on Python3 and has 1/3 of the dependencies we previously had. That doesn't mean that TurboGears can't work with the Pyramid team, we are in 2012 and most of the web frameworks are now build by many independent modules that provide some kind of feature to the framework. We will continue to share WebOb, Baker, WebHelpers, most of the repoze stack and many other things. It's just a matter of "would you like to replace 400 lines of custom code with a library thousands of lines big that won't do anything new and you will probably have to monkeypatch deeply like it happened with Pylons?". TurboGears already broke code of its past users too many times and doing it again would probably hurt the project a lot more than not having written on our homepage that we are whatever underlying framework based. On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:28 PM, Lukasz Szybalski <[email protected]> wrote: > My goal of writing today is to convince TG2 core developers to reconsider > their plans for not using pyramid, embrace the new changes in > pylons(pyramid), and reconfirm the state of the union between turbogears2 > and pylons project. Turbogears2 pylons backbone was a great success, it > consolidated python web frameworks, and provided a bigger community to > compete with others like django, ROR and was probably the perfect choice to > develop web applications fast. > Now 3 years later Turbogears2 (1K Downloads since 04/2012) is still strong > but pylons (11K Downloads) have merged with repoze.bfg(3K Downloads) to > create pyramid(14K Downloads since 05/2012), which merged the web frameworks > even more and brought over some of zope/plone community with it. > What these number mean for turbogears future is that if tg2 reconfirms their > ties to pyramid, it might become one of the most powerfull contender to > django (212K downloads). > > What are some pro's and cons with following pylons evolution: > > Pro: > --Features that pyramid is capable of would work by default in turbogears, > no rewrite of code would be required to take tg2 into python3 for example, > take the speed improvements, etc... > --All the components that were mentioned above from repoze.XXX would still > be valid and would follow pyramid upgrades and no additional work would be > required to get them working. > --Any changes to Paste would already be done in pyramid. > --Turbogears choice of most downloaded components as a default would bring > over few users that have high learning curve because of pyramid default > scaffolds selections. > --More consolidation would mean more of most common packages would be > available to users. > -- Instead of splitting from pylons embrace the evolution of pylons would > mean more users are reassured tg2 is the right choice to build on. > > Cons: > -- Some work is required to replace pylons components with pyramid > -- Some tg.ext would need to be updated to support new changes. > -- Core developers would have to go a little outside of their comfort zone > by not just "being happy" with current state of tg2 but to take it to the > next level. > -- Won't be able to "design" the new framework to replace pylons part, but > rather will need to include already written software. > > TG won't be perfect with pyramid at its core but I think a lot more users > will be happy with it, and want to continue to extend it, improve it, and > make it vibrant again. > > Would developers consider following the evolution of pylons and including > pyramid into turbogears? > > Thank you, > Lucas > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TurboGears Trunk" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/turbogears-trunk/-/55ZqKLBol6wJ. > > 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.
