Thanks.
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael Pedersen Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 11:37 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [TurboGears] New Application; seeking experienced advice Diez managed to cover most of the main points, so I've only got a couple of minor things to add. On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Sells, Fred <[email protected]> wrote: 1. Are there any features that would cause me to choose TG 2.1 over 2.0 other than the release status of 2.1? Especially given that I'm using Flex and not Genshi. There is one feature of 2.1 that should be considered. I'm not releasing numbers right now, since they're in a "Well, I didn't formally track them" state, but I am working on testing the speed of TG2 on Amazon's EC2 infrastructure using all the different sized instances. A loose number to consider is that I am seeing, at minimum, an 8 fold increase right now in speed. That number could be off, since I did those data points while testing that my images worked, rather than testing for speed. So, if speed is at all a concern, I'd look at 2.1. Even if it's not, it's possible that you will wish to use some of the extensions that I'm writing. I'm not targeting 2.0 with these. So, if the extensions matter, I'd look at 2.1. The ones that are currently written are tgext.menu and tgext.xmlrpc (both available via PyPI and at http://bitbucket.org/pedersen/ ). During June, I plan to implement tgext.config, which will provide a way to have a "trac web admin" like interface and configuration section. July is currently slated for tgext.usermgmt, which will provide a way to manage users, registrations (supporting OpenID, too), permissions, and the like. August is when I'll be working on tgext.mercurial, which will provide a way to host a mercurial based repository. I might switch it to tgext.vcs, to allow you to host svn or mercurial behind it. I've not decided on that as yet. So, there are reasons to consider 2.1 over 2.0. They might be enough to make you go with 2.1, they might not. But do consider them. 2. Will I encounter documentation "shortfalls" with 2.1 compared to 2.0. Actually, it will be quite the opposite. The 2.1 documentation is much more complete than 2.0, and is more reliable for searching and the like. It's still not perfect, but it is much better than it was. Just some added fuel for thought. -- Michael J. Pedersen My IM IDs: Jabber/[email protected], ICQ/103345809, AIM/pedermj022171 Yahoo/pedermj2002, MSN/[email protected] -- 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. -- 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.
