8 ms·

What this article taught me is the mind-boggling plethora of Python web frameworks out there. I'm heavily into Django myself, and it does well enough that I'm

• samlev 15y ago
  For me? Two. Django is good for getting a site/system up and running fast, so long as I'm not too concerned with specific implementation details (the users 'just work', etc.) Pyramid is good for a longer-term/more custom system where being easily able to modify (or choose) particular implementation details is important to me. It's not as fast to get a full-featured site off the ground, but the pieces glue together in a way that I really like. I think that there was a well known post many years ago about "glue" and "full stack" frameworks, comparing pylons (now pyramid) as the former, and django as the latter. #EDIT: Oh, and I used to do a bit of work with Zope/Plone, but that's pretty much what you'd consider to be the 'enterprisey' setup for python, and I wouldn't recommend it for most uses.
  • inovica 15y ago
    That mirrors exactly our experience. We have used Pyramid for three recent project and its awesome. It just takes a little longer, but its flexibility is impressive. We've just used it with Pure templates also, which I was very impressed with
• 7952 15y ago
  There is always a demand for something that feels and acts less monolithic.
• sontek 15y ago
  There can only be one! Pyramid