On Oct 3, 2006, at 12:56 PM, Neil Blakey-Milner wrote: > > On Tue 2006-10-03 (15:09), Adam Jones wrote: >> Neil Blakey-Milner wrote: >>> Hey there, >>> >>> I'm doing a "technology preview" of what TurboGears may look like >>> in the >>> near future - SQLAlchemy, Genshi, and Routes. So far, I like it >>> a lot - >>> Routes allows me to do some stuff I couldn't easily otherwise do. >> >> I hadn't heard anything about Routes being in the future for TG. My >> understanding was that the project is going to stick with CherryPy >> for >> the forseeable future. Do you have any pointers to what you saw that >> suggested this change? If this is just a bit of wishful thinking I >> agree with you. The rest of CherryPy is outstanding, but I prefer the >> explicit flexability of solutions like Routes. (That said CP can be >> very flexible, it just takes more cleverness than I like using in one >> place) > > Well, Kevin has said (he'll correct me if I'm wrong, I'm sure) that > he'd > like to make using Routes easier (for "legacy URLs", if I recall). > But > beyond that, nothing you're missing in terms of official direction. I > chose it because it's an alternative. I already know SQLObject and > Kid > and the CherryPy way, so I'm trying the ways I know less well.
Yes, this has been my take. I like the "configurationless" aspect of CherryPy, but there are those couple of use cases where Routes is ideal. Kevin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
