2008/9/17 [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Sep 16, 9:39 pm, "Jorge Vargas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> But back to the subject, nice talk. I saw a little hostility from the >> first question :) Other than that it turned out really good. > > Who was the guy that asked the first question? One of the lead > developers of Django I assume?
I'm guessing James Tauber? Of cloud27/Pinax fame? Definitely trying to "picking holes", IMO (although he chose straw men - he could have picked some serious holes!). > Mark, how did they know to ask you? I mean it was a great choice--- > but a weird one. Or did you volunteer? I agreed, it was an inspired choice. I attended PyCon UK last week, and it was excellent. Django has a heavy presence there (Jacob KM+ Simon Willison, two django leads were there giving talks), the django BOF had a good 25 people doing some really interesting things. There was some Pylons stuff, but little TG presence (Ian from ShowMeDo was there asking me questions about how to upgrade from TG1 to TG2). I hadn't seen any djangocon videos before I went, I've just watch Cal Henderson's and Mark's, and they completely define the conversations I had with django people at PyCon UK. django user: I would love cookie based sessions. me: Beaker? django user: When are we going to get multiple DB support? me: SQLAlchemy? I think Mark provided answers for 80% of the technical limitations of Django raised by Cal Henderson, maybe. Basically - great job Mark! You said exactly what I had been thinking (plus some!), with conviction and authority, without unnecessary antagonism. Brilliant. I had conversations with Jacob KM about exactly the things you talked about (e.g. WSGI<->Django middleware wrapper), and they are thinking of doing this, I think largely as a result of your talk. He confessed embarrassment as an engineer about the dependency graph, and was interested to learn more about how TG has handled easy_install (he didn't know you can supply your own egg repo via a html page). I was punching the air on the bus this morning as I watched your talk :) Two things I learned that Django does better than TG/Pylons, IMO: Style: Django stuff looks good. The culture in Django is more design orientated than TG, and I think that is a factor in their success. At PyCon UK, Stephen Emslie demo'd a nice interactive WSGI profiler module[1], and one the Django folk's comments was "Sweet! But you Pylons guys always make things so ugly - get a designer to give you a style sheet already". They have a point IMHO. Apps: Django has a large amount of plugin apps (wiki/forums/openid/tagging/notifications/IM/IRC/etc) that add functionality to the whole stack (views, controllers, middleware, model). They can do this because they know the whole stack in advance. The included admin interface is a classic example. Pylons doesn't dictate the whole stack, so its more difficult for people to write plugin apps that need top-to-bottom access. However, TG does make some choices, which might enable us to do more plugins apps, but we still value choice. RUM is likely the way forward here - if we write things to the RUM Factory apis[2], controller/model interactions can be abstracted to allow plugin apps to work with any stack component, in theory. That's all, sorry for the length! [1] http://pypi.python.org/pypi/WSGIProfile/0.1dev [2] http://toscawidgets.org/documentation/rum/developer/architecture.html#architecture -- Simon --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
