On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Tycon <adie...@gmail.com> wrote: > Pylons has some useful things in it, however most of them are actually > independent packages that pylons just depends on. The definition of a > meta-package - in the context of Debian's APT, for instance - is a > package that doesn't have any content of its own, but it's simply a > list of dependencies on other package, so that users can get all > those other packages by installing the meta-package.
That's where META PACKAGE definition does not apply to Pylons. Pylons has source code, glue code and utility code. Hence is hardly just a meta package. Yes, you are not constrained to use the default packages, but that's not being a meta package, that's being a pluggable architecture. Debian metapackages are just a list of dependencies to install and a label > The question is what does pylons add of its own to make it more than a > meta-package (which is just a list of dependencies). It has a bunch of > useful decorators - https, beaker_cache, validate - but they are all > so flawed (https throws away query params, beaker cant handle > memcache, validate has flawed design and produces invalid html) that I > had to write my own. It's also a series of variables and objects you use during the development phase. I don't use those decorators myself but it's not true that beaker can't handle memcached At least not the version I use ;-) > I considered the basic strength to be the HTTP server which comes from > Paste which I guess together with some other sub-modules provides all > the HTTP request processing. But then I found out about CherryPy 3 and > confirmed it gives much better performance and a dispatching > architecture, so what exactly is left in pylons ? Paste and CP3 are not meant to be used in the deployment phase. I really don't care about who's fast during development mode (either Paste or CP3 or something else), I do care that mod_wsgi in Apache or nginx or lighttpd are solid. > Maybe Routes, but if the only route you need is "controller/action/ > id" (which I think CherryPy supports) dispatch is enough, then we > don't even need routes fancy (and most likely wasteful and expensive) > mapping. > Mako, SQLAlchemy, and FormEncode are all great but can be used > independently. Yes, you can use pure WSGI too instead of Pylons I'm losing you here, what are you trying to prove? -- Lawrence, http://oluyede.org - http://twitter.com/lawrenceoluyede "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on not understanding it" - Upton Sinclair --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
