Specifically, it is my understanding that Turbogears provides no standard mechanism for "plugging in" new functionality. For example, lets say I have an existing Turbogears site and I need blog functionality. Sure I could use Turboblog but I would either have merge my existing site with the Turboblog codebase or I would have to host the blog as a distinct app. Using Django for example, I have the option of plugging in a blog app such as basic blog or banjo without too much fuss. It may very well be that Turbogears does in fact provide this functionality, but if so, there is no obvious indication that it is possible.
On Nov 3, 3:57 pm, "Mark Ramm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As much as I had enjoyed using Turbogears for the past couple of > > years, I had moved on to django because django > > offered more flexibility in terms of developing component based > > applications. Turbogears simply does not provide the facilities > > that would allow one to harness components in an extensible manner. > > I think this last bit deserves a little more detail. What exactly > are you saying that TurboGears does not allow? > > This is not some kind of rhetorical question, I would very much like > to know what you think is missing from TG or TG2 that django provides. > > To me it seems like the turbogears registration module, silverplate, > and others have shown that this is possible, even if it's not been > done as much as it has in Django, and even if the way to do this stuff > may not be as well documented or as obvious as it is in Django (which > I admit are significant issues that we need to resolve). > > ---Mark --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
