On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 3:13 PM, mdipierro <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I understand what you are trying to say but when you say "no one is > using web2py" gives people the wrong impression and not the correct > one. It is not fair to member of this community who use web2py. Massimo - "no one is using..." are your words, not mine - what I _did_ say is there is a gross shortage of sites you can point to that serve signicifant users (PyCon registration being the one clear exception). This doesn't need to be fair or unfair - it just data - what is (I hesitate to say "fact" as there may be unknown data). > > > You should also assume that there are lots of people on this list who > are considering web2py but have not yet made their mind about it. There are people who consider using it for developing projects. Do you deny it would help them, if they are to present to their partners, their clients, their boards, etc. if we had more evidence collected and available for them (us) to use as resources? Do you realy believe this is not useful? Data is not useful? Ach! Serving that community - even if it gets uncomfortable - if fair. > > > As you pointed out Pycon 2009 used web2py to register 800 users and > handled thousands of monetary transactions. This is significant. Cooperated w/ django app for site info. > > http://www.klasproducts.com/ uses web2py to sell hundreds of products This is important, if small quantity. It is a nice site. > > http://www.spinyc.com/ uses web2py in their intranet This is significant, but anecdotal (nothing you can show someone for them to experience; perhaps a mockup that is open would be possible?). Runs with RorR as main site (and all we can see / point to). > > http://www.whitepeaksoftware.com/ uses web2py for their web site For purposes of showing web2py look and feel, this is just a website front done in web2py; The storefront is something else; the blog is wordpress. There is nothing of the "benefits" of web2py to show here I could see. That is not to criticize - no sense re-inventing wheels; use what is available, and build what is new and interesting. But from the standpoint of being a showcase example for this community to draw on - for people wanting to show sites that take advantage of the benefits of web2py, I do not feel this belongs on this list. We need to be more discerning. > > http://diarywiz.com/ is powered by web2py This is a real application example. I'm not sure how it is significant in terms of what it does new (for example, like survey tool did), and I'm not sure that I would show this as an example to clients, boards, etc.... It seems like an appropriate example for prospective developers. > > > There are just some of those we know about and choose to advertise > what they do. So that is 2 for "showcase" - one very low usage ("hundreds"), one seasonal but successful (near 1000 users). > > > Of course more people will come out eventually. As I said most of the > work is done on intranet apps. Let's hear talk about them. Even if someone can't name the company, or the specifics it is useful to hear kinds of things. > > There is no question that Django is more popular and Drupal is > probably much more popular than web2py. They have been around longer, > came first and had more time to build a community. Moreover Drupal is > a designed to build CMS therefore apps made with Drupal are naturally > publicly available. I am pointing out what will be helpful here, for web2py, for this community. I am stating what I could use now, what I want Those other things, comparing, are just distractions (inasmuch as they serve as guideposts, examples, lessons of aspects we can benefit from). > > I do not think discussion about how popular we are vs how popular they > are is healthy. Moreover despite what some people think I do not care > much about it. I would like the discussion to focus more on what we do > better (feature wise), what they do better, what can we do to improve > our features, what can we do to promote web2py features. I am puzzled why you keep using the term "popular" - you must have some issue with this. There is "fad"; there is popular because useful, reasons behind use (e.g. excercise is popular - it helps you stay healthy! When the evidence smoking was bad for health became available, smoking became much less "popular"). Discussing what we can do better feature wise - and this is my point - I'd like to see balanced with EVIDENCE / EXAMPLES of that "better" - "Here - look at this site, for example; or look at this example site." People ask ME for that, and it's a fair request. > Some people are not interested in features as are only interested in > learning the system that will give them the highest chance of getting > hired. Some people are interested in features as a way to get the job > done better and quicker. I am working for this second class of users. > I am interested in building a community for these people. Your own words: "...get *the job done* better, quicker..." It's what I hear -> "You say this is better? Show me." Show me the jobs. *sigh* A little intentional focus on this kind of evidence, on *applied* "better, quicker" can only help web2py. Thinking about "I think this will be easier" is fun, creative; When it works in many hands / many situations, is work, not always so much "fun"; this is what builds confidence. This is nothing new. For _your_ comfort, I will say no more on this topic - regardles, I think that clear talk about this topic is in the best interests of web2py, the web2py community. > > Massimo > Yarko --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py Web Framework" 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/web2py?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
