3 ms·
Definitely, the biggest hiccup has been the py3 migration. But generally, once a framework is stable on a major version, it seems to have very minor necessities
by deaddodo 4y ago
Definitely, the biggest hiccup has been the py3 migration. But generally, once a framework is stable on a major version, it seems to have very minor necessities for upkeep (though, changes for new features definitely can improve the functionality).
As to flask, I would love to see it reach the milestone that Openbox has achieved of “being done” and only really being updated for bug+security fixes or base language feature updates. As a “micro framework”, it has perfectly filled it’s necessary niche.
- JustSomeNobody 4y agoSadly, if it were “done”, a lot of devs would complain that it was dead and stop using it.
- Supermancho 4y ago> Sadly, if it were “done”, a lot of devs would complain that it was dead and stop using it Both pessimistic and incorrect. You can observe the vast number of libraries across all ecosystems that are in use, as reliable libraries, well into functional obsolescence. Not to say some niche software doesn't suffer the fate of "nothing new, so it's dead" but that's not the norm. Web frameworks are never feature-complete, per se. There are always new technologies and workflows to support. Frameworks are usually considered dead when the development halts in exhaustion or in transition to another project (as individuals, the development team members drift to these modalities), not when they are "done" by some finite collection of features.