On Jul 27, 2010, at 12:33 , waugust wrote: > So, I divert the topic from technical questions to this rant to ask > you: Why and how is it possible for the industry to allow us to > degrade the progress of technology in favor of good marketing?
As a long-time Rails user and new TurboGears user, let me make some comments in Rails' favor, and to compare and contrast what I've seen of TurboGears so far. First: it is much easier to get into Rails because there is an order of magnitude (maybe two) of documentation, much of it of very high standard. The documentation that there is for TurboGears is of quite good standard, but there isn't enough of it, and much of it is out of date or incomplete. Second: you are selling Rails rather short. I can't say yet whether TurboGears is better, but Rails is very good. And Rails v3 in particular is a very solid and mature product. I can get shit done in Rails 3 very quickly, and what I write is concise, readable and easy to maintain. Ruby and Python are both, I think, equally good languages for different reasons. Most developers I know who have spent time with both find both quite comfortable and effective languages. This is certainly my opinion. >From what I've seen, TurboGears is a much more loosely coupled design than is >Rails (although Rails 3 is now similarly loose), which I like. And I like the >batteries that are included, particularly ToscaWidgets. As I say, I'm not familiar enough with TurboGears to offer an opinion about which is better. But I think that even if TurboGears is better, it cannot be by as much as you suggest. Rails really is very good. -- 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.
