4 ms·
So, that sits firmly where Django/Rails are at, except that you use a GUI rather than code to define the models? I suppose that lowers the bar ever so slightly,
by ezst 11mo ago
So, that sits firmly where Django/Rails are at, except that you use a GUI rather than code to define the models? I suppose that lowers the bar ever so slightly, because any management rule or business logic is still deferred to a proper framework/programming language. Seems very niche and limiting, all things considered.
- shagrath 11mo agoNo you can setup everything (models and db migrations) with code, no need to use the gui, it's just here for "convienence" if you want it
- d1sxeyes 11mo agoI’m not quite sure what your point is, but it’s designed as a friendly but powerful GUI to quickly get a backend up and running. It might not fit your use case, which is fine, but there are a lot of use cases it does fit, and my original point was that it’s more than you might think. I wouldn’t really describe it as niche and limiting though, that sounds quite dismissive of what is actually a pretty impressive piece of software.
- evantbyrne 11mo agoI wouldn't group it with Django. It's a very simple but also well-done CMS. It is not as capable as something like Wagtail, Payload, or Craft.
- F7F7F7 11mo agoIt’s niche and limiting in the same way that Supabase and Firebase are niche and limiting.