3 ms·
Depending on the client, I usually use either: - A customized Django admin interface (https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.7/ref/contrib/admin/ https://docs.dja
by lastofus 12y ago
Depending on the client, I usually use either:
- A customized Django admin interface (https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.7/ref/contrib/admin/ https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.7/ref/contrib/admin/). Yes it's not ideal but it's often good enough.
- A fully custom admin UI built from scratch (Python/Django).
I don't know why you don't think Rails/Django is an option when developing "full-fledged systems".
For hosting, deploying with Ansible to a Digital Ocean VM has worked very well. A $5/mo droplet is more than enough for light - moderate traffic.
- mertemin 12y agoI had a typing mistake. Indeed, Rails/Django is for developing full-fledged systems, but what I am building is really lightweight and simpler than those.
- lastofus 12y agoI also use Django for very small/lightweight/simple websites. Django is very good about staying out of your way if you don't want to make use of its built-in magic. If you ignore the "batteries included" parts of Django (ORM, class based views, forms, auth, caching, etc), it's still a good/easy/structured way of routing URLs to a python function, which seems to be the appeal of Flask. The function takes in a request object, and returns a string for output. Can't really be more simple than that.
- giaour 12y agoI've usually found that more opinionated frameworks are better at making lightweight and simple applications. When working in Python, I will only reach for Flask or Bottle when I know that my problem is complex enough that Django will get in the way.