[Web-SIG] http://wiki.python.org/moin/WebFrameworks

[Chris McDonough]

http://wiki.python.org/moin/WebFrameworks seems to be the place where folks are
registering their respective web frameworks.

I'd like to move some of the frameworks which are currently in the various
categories which haven't been active in a few years. In particular, I'd like
to move any framework which hasn't had a release since the beginning of 2008
(arbitrary) into the "Discontinued / Inactive" framework category. I'd be
willing to do the work to make sure I wasn't moving one that actually *did*
have releases past that but just hadn't updated the page.

Any dissent?

- C

_______________________________________________
Web-SIG mailing list
Web...@python.org
Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/python-web-sig-garchive-9074%40googlegroups.com

[Mark Ramm]

No dissent here. I think that page should be kept as up to date and
relevant as possible, because we do have a diverse set of web tools,
which can make it hard to choose, so having some summary is a very
good thing.

I also think that diversity is one of the most important signs of a
healthy ecosystem, so we should celebrate it, in spite of some of the
"one framework to rule them all" crowd.

--Mark Ramm

> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/mark.mchristensen%40gmail.com
>

--
Mark Ramm-Christensen
email: mark at compoundthinking dot com
blog: www.compoundthinking.com/blog

[Aaron Watters]

>
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Chris McDonough <chr...@plope.com>
> wrote:
> > http://wiki.python.org/moin/WebFrameworks
> seems to be the place where folks
> > are registering their respective web frameworks.
> >
> > I'd like to move some of the frameworks which are
> currently in the various
> > categories which haven't been active in a few years.
>  In particular, I'd
> > like to move any framework which hasn't had a release
> since the beginning of
> > 2008 (arbitrary) into the "Discontinued / Inactive"
> framework category.  I'd
> > be willing to do the work to make sure I wasn't moving
> one that actually
> > *did* have releases past that but just hadn't updated
> the page.
> >
> > Any dissent?
> >
> > - C

Why not call them "apparently stable"
versus "under active development"? Is the
cgi module "discontinued"?

I'm a little sensitive on this topic
because people tell me that Gadfly is "inactive"
or "discontinued"
but it still does what it does
as documented very well.

Frequent releases may actually be a sign of
bugginess and bad design.
If you suspect a project is really dead, maybe you
could try to contact the authors and ask about
what they think.

-- Aaron Watters

===
BTW, I think "Release early, release often" is nonsense
because it means you are probably releasing
something buggy and unstable which will just alienate
your users, who will never come back to see the better
version.

[Chris McDonough]

Aaron Watters wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Chris McDonough <chr...@plope.com>
>> wrote:
>>> http://wiki.python.org/moin/WebFrameworks
>> seems to be the place where folks
>>> are registering their respective web frameworks.
>>>
>>> I'd like to move some of the frameworks which are
>> currently in the various
>>> categories which haven't been active in a few years.
>> In particular, I'd
>>> like to move any framework which hasn't had a release
>> since the beginning of
>>> 2008 (arbitrary) into the "Discontinued / Inactive"
>> framework category. I'd
>>> be willing to do the work to make sure I wasn't moving
>> one that actually
>>> *did* have releases past that but just hadn't updated
>> the page.
>>> Any dissent?
>>>
>>> - C
>
> Why not call them "apparently stable"
> versus "under active development"? Is the
> cgi module "discontinued"?

No, but the cgi module has undergone a lot of changes over the last couple of
years which were present in Python releases:

http://svn.python.org/view/python/branches/release26-maint/Lib/cgi.py?view=log

> I'm a little sensitive on this topic
> because people tell me that Gadfly is "inactive"
> or "discontinued"
> but it still does what it does
> as documented very well.
>
> Frequent releases may actually be a sign of
> bugginess and bad design.

Agreed. On the other hand, though, no release for two years sometimes *does*
mean it's dead. It's slightly unfair to the folks who are very actively
improving a web framework to live in a "slot" on that page right next to
actually-really-dead software because of the vagarities of lexical sorting.

> If you suspect a project is really dead, maybe you
> could try to contact the authors and ask about
> what they think.

Well, that was my intention. I don't want to remove *actually* active or
stable-and-still-used packages from the list. Maybe I should just dial back
the date to the beginning of 2007 or something.

- C

[exa...@twistedmatrix.com]

On 28 Nov, 08:03 pm, chr...@plope.com wrote:
>Well, that was my intention. I don't want to remove *actually* active
>or stable-and-still-used packages from the list. Maybe I should just
>dial back the date to the beginning of 2007 or something.

Instead of trying to do this based on an arbitrary date, I'd suggest
investigating the communities and developers for each project listed on
the page. If no one is using the software, or the developers feel it
would be appropriate to delist the software (or the developers are no
longer responsive to communication attempts), then delisting it is
probably a good idea. Otherwise, I think things should basically be
left alone.

Jean-Paul

[Ian Bicking]

Personally, if the author/maintainer of any library claims it is maintained/up-to-date, I say trust them.  Most people are pretty honest about the status of their projects.  But it does require a positive response to really make this claim.

Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/ianb%40colorstudy.com

--
Ian Bicking  |  http://blog.ianbicking.org  |  http://topplabs.org/civichacker