4 ms·

I've been steeped in Pylons for several years now. I agree that Pylons has nothing to get excited about. However, (and this is the important part) it provided r

I've been steeped in Pylons for several years now. I agree that Pylons has nothing to get excited about. However, (and this is the important part) it provided really straightforward glue to integrate a few other things that are definitely worth getting excited about: SQLAlchemy, Mako/Jinja, Routes, Beaker, and Paste. Pylons' past philosophy always seemed to be "we'll take the best-in-breed of python web software and put it together in an elegant way." Sadly, they seem to have abandoned that philosophy for the sake of protecting the precious nest eggs of massive full-stack framework developers. While the new changes to Pylons certainly don't prevent you from using the aforementioned exceptional-quality components, the smushing-together of projects while trying to retain legacy compatibility seems to have created an enormous system where there isn't a cohesive or consistent way of doing things. No thanks--I think I'll go for WebOb and its lightweight performance.

chrism 16y ago
A defense: http://docs.pylonshq.com/pyramid/dev/designdefense.html#pyramid-provides-more-than-one-way-to-do-it http://docs.pylonshq.com/pyramid/dev/designdefense.html#pyra...
stdbrouw 16y ago
Yep, nothing but love for SQLAlchemy, Jinja, Routes and Beaker. But even given those components, it's still a hard sell. Reminds me of this blogpost from a while back: http://www.hindsightlabs.com/blog/2010/03/15/jinja2-and-django-4ever/ http://www.hindsightlabs.com/blog/2010/03/15/jinja2-and-djan... "In the beginning, there was Django, and it was good. But gradually we began to find its paradigms counterintuitive: we disliked the idea of apps and considered the built-in template language pretty crippled. More importantly, we prefer the epically powerful SQLAlchemy to Django’s ORM of Doom, so with the evidence before us, we switched to Pylons and the haven of SQLAlchemy/Jinja, only to discover we had switched from a shitty apartment in Brooklyn to a tent in the desert. No cockroaches, true, but no running water, either. Who really wants to write a thumbnail library? (Apologies to anyone who has actually written a thumbnail library)"

chrism 16y ago

A defense: http://docs.pylonshq.com/pyramid/dev/designdefense.html#pyramid-provides-more-than-one-way-to-do-it http://docs.pylonshq.com/pyramid/dev/designdefense.html#pyra...

stdbrouw 16y ago

Yep, nothing but love for SQLAlchemy, Jinja, Routes and Beaker. But even given those components, it's still a hard sell. Reminds me of this blogpost from a while back: http://www.hindsightlabs.com/blog/2010/03/15/jinja2-and-django-4ever/ http://www.hindsightlabs.com/blog/2010/03/15/jinja2-and-djan... "In the beginning, there was Django, and it was good. But gradually we began to find its paradigms counterintuitive: we disliked the idea of apps and considered the built-in template language pretty crippled. More importantly, we prefer the epically powerful SQLAlchemy to Django’s ORM of Doom, so with the evidence before us, we switched to Pylons and the haven of SQLAlchemy/Jinja, only to discover we had switched from a shitty apartment in Brooklyn to a tent in the desert. No cockroaches, true, but no running water, either. Who really wants to write a thumbnail library? (Apologies to anyone who has actually written a thumbnail library)"