[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > iceberg.) The Pylons, web.py, Karrigell, Webware and TurboGears people > might (rightly) feel slighted if you include Django but not their > frameworks.
Yeah well, the Wxpython, PyQt, PyGTK etc. people may feel slighted that Tkinter got included and their stuff didn't, and the Eric, Eclipse, Komodo etc. people may feel slighted that IDLE got included, but that doesn't stop Tkinter and IDLE from being useful and worth shipping in Python. We were talking about db connectivity modules which are quite a bit simpler than tkinter. We were also talking about an SSL wrapper, which *is* included with Python, but is broken (doesn't examine certificates) so people use external modules instead, which is just lame. > Where would you stop? At the boundaries of your particular application > interests? Basic competitive analysis. People ask here all the time "I'm trying to write application XYZ, should I use language L or should I use Python" (L is usually Java or PHP but can be other things). There's always immediately a flood of responses about why Python is better than language L for application XYZ. If the Pythonistas are serious about such a claim, competitive analysis says they should be willing to look at what language L does to support application XYZ (example: PHP includes database connectivity), make a checklist of L's features, and see to it that Python achieves (at least) parity in those areas. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
