Pyramid has the advantage that its official docs are already the length and quality of a book, and I think an earlier version of it (the BFG manual) was even published. Now it's essentially a print-it-yourself book.
The Pylons Book is a product of its time. Maybe we should just release Pylons 1.2 unchanged to eliminate confusion. The Pylons Book *is* thorough and well-written, but it's dated and a couple chapters delved into esoteric areas (the author's unique libraries). My first recommendation to people would be to just use Pyramid, which is "Pylons 2". If they want to use Pylons, they should read the online docs, and be aware that some gaps have appeared. (Some links to third-party documentation are dead, and "go-pylons.py was lost and no longer works so you'll have to install a virtualenv and Pylons manually.) If they want to follow the Pylons Book they need to check the online docs for the differences between Pylons 1 and 0.9.7. On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Jonathan Vanasco <jonat...@findmeon.com>wrote: > I was going batty today trying to figure out why documentation , > recommendations, and changelogs were conflicting when migrating an old > Pylons project. > > Then I finally realized the problem - and noticed a large number of > people on StackOverflow were suffering from the same issue: > > - The "Pylons Book" was/is often quoted and recommended for it's > thoroughness > - The "Pylons Book" is written for the Framework of 0.9.7 > - The "Pylons Framework" is at 1.0.1 > - The "Pylons Book" online is versioned, there was a 1.0 and it was > updated to a 1.1. It follows this URL Pattern - > http://pylonsbook.com/en/1.1/ > and has this on the top of every page "Pylons Book v1.1 > documentation" The book is still written for the "Framework 0.9.7" > release though -- not the "Framework 1.0" changes. > > It finally hit me that people were referencing the 1.1 documentation , > assuming it was for the 1.1 framework release. But there is no 1.1 > framework release -- just 1.0.1. People weren't misquoting the > framework release number - they were trying to use the 1.1 book , > which covers 0.9.7 , on the 1.0.1 release - and total confusion > occurred. > > Anyways, I think the moral of this story is that Pyramid shouldn't do > this. I don't know how , but any docs ( official or 3rd party ) > shouldn't go off into a versioning system that is confusingly similar > to Pylons. > > -- > 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. > > -- Mike Orr <sluggos...@gmail.com> -- 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.
