turbogears or django?
Swan Wing
turbogears or django ? who can tell me, how to I select which one?
regards
Swan Wing
--
========================
无人信高洁，谁为表予心
Igor Foox
> Hello,
> turbogears or django ? who can tell me, how to I select which
> one?
>
> regards
>
> Swan Wing
>
I think posting to the TurboGears mailing list asking for someone to
choose for
you is a bit strange. Both have their strengths and weaknesses.
You could either try both out, both have pretty good tutorials
and quick howtos.
Or you could search the web for the inevitably existent comparisons:
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=turbogears
+django&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
Igor
Sanjay
go through. Or take the shortcut I took - Turbogear's builtin support
for SQLAlchemy was sufficient for me to decide on it. All other ORMs
seemed cramped to me.
sanjay
Steve Bergman
Igor Foox wrote:
> Or you could search the web for the inevitably existent comparisons:
> http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=turbogears
> +django&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
Unfortunately, last I looked, most of the comparisons were out of date.
For some reason there was a frenzy of blog postings about a year ago
which has since subsided, so you see a lot of comparisons of TG 0.8.x
to other frameworks.
I've not used Django, but I have spent time reading what other people
have to say about the two, and my impression is the Django is a quality
framework which is very strong in the area of content management. If
you have a site with various contributors and need them to be able to
add and manage the content, Django may be exactly what you need.
TurboGears is, I believe a more generalized framework that lends itself
to a wider array of Web/Intranet apps. It can do content management,
and I imagine Django can do things that are *not* content management.
But, for example, with Django doing content management, you get the
actual management UI for free, whereas you would have to write it under
TG.
"Try them both" is probably good advice, but as I hardly ever do any
CM, I just cut right to TG.
Ilias Lazaridis
> On 15-Dec-06, at 7:51 PM, Swan Wing wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> > turbogears or django ? who can tell me, how to I select which
> > one?
> >
> > regards
> >
> > Swan Wing
> >
>
> I think posting to the TurboGears mailing list asking for someone to
> choose for you is a bit strange.
No, it's not strange.
Professional tools provide such "whitepapers", in which offers of
competitors are compared.
Several of such comparisons suggest honestly to use a competitive
product for several use-cases.
So, the turbo-gears project could provide a wiki page, where comparison
to other frameworks can happen.
.
Ilias Lazaridis
Ο/Η Swan Wing έγραψε:
> Hello,
> turbogears or django ? who can tell me, how to I select which one?
I've halted the turboGears evaluation due to the missing
schema-evolution support (which I rate as inacceptable for an RAPID
webdevelopment toolkit):
http://case.lazaridis.com/wiki/TurboGearsAudit
More interestingly, the django-project has rejected contribution
subjecting schema-evolution-support (a working prototype is provided
herein):
http://case.lazaridis.com/wiki/DjangoAudit
Currently, I would suggest you to use TurboGears, because Django serves
special interests of special entities, which have an 'we do it all
ourself' attitude.
The TurboGears Project is more 'open source' like project, and
integrates 3rd party projects into a whole thing, reducing this way the
development effort.
There's a new version of "TurboEntity" (independent project) on the
way, which should simplify the persistency layer.
.
Igor Foox
It's not strange in the sense that it's out of place, it's strange in
the sense
that a simple search of this mailing list would have brought several
such
comparisons.
Ilias Lazaridis
Ok, but the community can summarize those and place them into a central
place, thus new users (and evaluators) are not force to search within
archives.
btw: that's one of the differences between "toy's" and "tools" ("go
search" vs. "go there")
.
Igor Foox
Agreed, that would be a useful piece of documentation.
Steve Bergman
"""I've halted the turboGears evaluation..."""
"""
The TurboGears Project is more 'open source' like project, and
integrates 3rd party projects into a whole thing, reducing this way the
development effort.
There's a new version of "TurboEntity" (independent project) on the
way, which should simplify the persistency layer.
"""
"""
Ok, but the community can summarize those and place them into a central
place, thus new users (and evaluators) are not force to search within
archives.
btw: that's one of the differences between "toy's" and "tools" ("go
search" vs. "go there")
"""
Wow. I had to doublecheck the "From:" header.
Good posts. Spot on in all the above quotes. Glad to hear you've
stopped the silly and unsolicited "evaluation" and have some good
***constructive*** criticisms to make.
Diez B. Roggisch
>
> Good posts. Spot on in all the above quotes. Glad to hear you've
> stopped the silly and unsolicited "evaluation" and have some good
> ***constructive*** criticisms to make.
Illias is not a pure Troll or Nitwit, but his aggressive style (accusing
TG of being a toy and so on... ) together with his usual "the community
doesn't do what I declare has to be done and thus is failing"-stance
make him an annoyance - to say the least.
If all it takes to make a good post is to remind people that more/better
documentation is needed, I just set up a daily reminder post and become
poster-of-the-week for the next year or so. Because that is true for
nearly every project alive, FOSS or commercial. And even though his
current demands are relatively concrete, they still are only demands,
but he doesn't compile the information he wants in a wikipage himself
(which is what wikis are for), but just complains about them missing.
_Really_ helpful are posts that help others. I've not seen anything like
this from him _ever_, regardless of which forum I've seen him.
Regards,
Diez
Steve Bergman
If all it takes to make a good post is to remind people that
more/better
documentation is needed, I just set up a daily reminder post and become
poster-of-the-week for the next year or so. Because that is true for
nearly every project alive, FOSS or commercial.
"""
Well, in contrast to his usual style, I think it was a pretty
constructive post.
That said, and with a reminder upfront that I really appreciate the
hard work and labor of love that TurboGears devs have contributed, TG
documentation definitely trails projects like RoR.
I have worked with both, and though I had Python experience but no Ruby
experience, I found RoR much easier to pick up, largely because, as
Ilias pointed out, I could "go to" and not "search for". The API docs
for RoR are great.
With TG, it seems like I am forever fumbling around for a mini-howto on
a wiki somewhere when what I need is reference documentation at a known
location.
The book, which I purchased as soon as it was available, is a great
help. If I had that and good API reference docs, I'd be happy as a
clam. (If I had "TurboGears in a Nutshell", along the lines of "Python
in a Nutshell", I'd be in seventh heaven.) ;-)
I truly hope that this does not come off like a whine because it is not
intended to. But spades is spades and TG docs are presently behind the
curve.
Adam Jones
Steve Bergman wrote:
>
> With TG, it seems like I am forever fumbling around for a mini-howto on
> a wiki somewhere when what I need is reference documentation at a known
> location.
Thanks for the feedback. If you have any specific examples you can
think of, I would love to hear it. After you spend a good bit of time
with a project you internalize a lot of the little snags that trip
people up when they are starting. If you have the time and would like
to send a list of things you found either on or off list, or on
http://docs.turbogears.org/1.0/RoughDocs/DocumentationWishList it would
help a lot.
Also, if anyone is looking to pitch in on docs, that would be a good
place to look for ideas. We've come a long way on documentation, but
there is always something else to be done.
-Adam
Steve Bergman
list. (A very tall order, I know!)
How did "If it isn't documented, it doesn't exist" get left out of "The
Zen of Python"?
Seriously. After much searching and uncertainty, I've decided on
Python as the language that I really want to devote time to learning
well.
It's a beautiful language. I grok the philosophy. But for a language
that prizes explicitness, readability, maintainability, unit testing,
and great built in self-documentation features, it seems to me that
Python projects are particularly poorly documented.
But I'm sure I can come up with a few things with a lower barrier to
entry than "A Complete API Reference" to submit to the wishlist. ;-)
Mark Ramm
I'm still working on securing the space we need downtown, but I'm expecting that many of the contributers will only be available via skype, and other virtual means.
The API docs need to be generated from docstrings, so somebody could work on the API doc generation process (I think Kevin has a plan for this) and others could work on improving our Docstring utilization.
--Mark Ramm
Mark Ramm-Christensen
email: mark at compoundthinking dot com
blog: www.compoundthinking.com/blog
Christopher Arndt
> I'm planning a DocSprint for January 13th, the day before Bruce Eckel's
> TurboGears jam.
>
> I'm still working on securing the space we need downtown, but I'm
> expecting that many of the contributers will only be available via
> skype, and other virtual means.
Sounds cool, I would volunteer to contribute to this if it's possible to join
remotely from Germany (I lived in Ireland for some time, my English should be
good enough).
Chris
Steve Bergman
the day before Bruce Eckel's
TurboGears jam.
"""
I've been quite intrigued by Bruce's interest in TG.
While I've already expressed a desire for "TurboGears in a Nutshell",
Is "Thinking in TurboGears" a possibility?
Mark Ramm
>
> While I've already expressed a desire for "TurboGears in a Nutshell",
> Is "Thinking in TurboGears" a possibility?
I doubt there's a large enough market for it. I'd like to see Bruce
finish the python/paterns project he started several years ago, but I
don't think the market was big enough to sustain such a book at the
time. If I remember correctly it was called "Thinking in Python."
Ilias Lazaridis
> > Wow. I had to doublecheck the "From:" header.
> >
> > Good posts. Spot on in all the above quotes. Glad to hear you've
> > stopped the silly and unsolicited "evaluation" and have some good
> > ***constructive*** criticisms to make.
>
> Illias is not a pure Troll or Nitwit, but his aggressive style (accusing
> TG of being a toy and so on... ) together with his usual "the community
> doesn't do what I declare has to be done and thus is failing"-stance
> make him an annoyance - to say the least.
It's not me who _declares_ what has to be done.
It's Naturality.
Naturally, Entry Barriers must be removed to achieve the goal "increase
user base".
> If all it takes to make a good post is to remind people that more/better
> documentation is needed, I just set up a daily reminder post and become
> poster-of-the-week for the next year or so. Because that is true for
> nearly every project alive, FOSS or commercial. And even though his
> current demands are relatively concrete, they still are only demands,
> but he doesn't compile the information he wants in a wikipage himself
> (which is what wikis are for), but just complains about them missing.
Nothing special.
It's like any other enhancement request from any other user.
Otherwise, ticket systems would remain empty.
I've filed the issue:
http://trac.turbogears.org/turbogears/ticket/1210
and naturally, this _cannot_ lead to a comment like "hey, troll, why
don't you provide the docu yourself"?
> _Really_ helpful are posts that help others. I've not seen anything like
> this from him _ever_, regardless of which forum I've seen him.
That's just because you don't _want_ to see them.
Anyway, I understand that it's difficult to say : "hey, possibly we
were wrong".
.
Adam Jones
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> Ο/Η Diez B. Roggisch έγραψε:
> > documentation is needed, I just set up a daily reminder post and become
> > poster-of-the-week for the next year or so. Because that is true for
> > nearly every project alive, FOSS or commercial. And even though his
> > current demands are relatively concrete, they still are only demands,
> > but he doesn't compile the information he wants in a wikipage himself
> > (which is what wikis are for), but just complains about them missing.
>
> Nothing special.
>
> It's like any other enhancement request from any other user.
>
> Otherwise, ticket systems would remain empty.
>
> I've filed the issue:
>
> http://trac.turbogears.org/turbogears/ticket/1210
>
> and naturally, this _cannot_ lead to a comment like "hey, troll, why
> don't you provide the docu yourself"?
Actually, considering one of your stated goals here is to evaluate
TurboGears, and you seem to have the same goal for at least Django, I
think you are in a relatively unique position to provide insight (and
thus, documentation) on the matter. Obviously I am not expecting you to
be able to provide a detailed description of the goals for the
TurboGears project, but describing it in relation to other frameworks
is much easier for someone who has evaluated many of them.
-Adam
Ilias Lazaridis
Ο/Η Adam Jones έγραψε:
Your thoughts are basicly right.
But my evaluations have weaknesses:
* They are for a specific context
* They are not complete
http://case.lazaridis.com/wiki/Stack
a main problem I had is the missing schema evolution support, which
caused me to halt the evaluations:
http://case.lazaridis.com/wiki/Persist
Due to personal reasons (and due to the massive resistance which delayd
my work during this year), I will most possibly stop the work at the
end of the year.
However, I will place a license on the results, thus they can be reused
by any interested party.
.
Diez B. Roggisch
>
> Otherwise, ticket systems would remain empty.
>
> I've filed the issue:
>
> http://trac.turbogears.org/turbogears/ticket/1210
>
> and naturally, this _cannot_ lead to a comment like "hey, troll, why
> don't you provide the docu yourself"?
You mean that ticket you opened two hours ago is a good point in a discussion
about taking initiative that ran 3 days ago? Brillant.
And that the ticket rephrases your DEMAND that SOMEBODY does something you
think is useful instead of being A CONTRIBUTION OF THAT INFORMATION by YOU
does again support my point: you're a constant claimer of things to be done,
but never do anything yourself. Thanks for making it soooo easy to see for
everybody.
Diez
Ilias Lazaridis
> > It's like any other enhancement request from any other user.
> >
> > Otherwise, ticket systems would remain empty.
> >
> > I've filed the issue:
> >
> > http://trac.turbogears.org/turbogears/ticket/1210
> >
> > and naturally, this _cannot_ lead to a comment like "hey, troll, why
> > don't you provide the docu yourself"?
>
> You mean that ticket you opened two hours ago is a good point in a discussion
seems I was wrong.
.