On 02/22/2013 02:49 PM, Monte Milanuk wrote: > Web2py does seem pretty attractive in that it seems to come with a lot > of functionality rolled in already. It seems to be pretty easy to > deploy... since this would be more of a case where the volunteer match > directors are not necessarily computer gurus, and something that can > literally run from a USB stick on nearly any computer has its benefits. > I've seen some examples (I think) of twitter-bootstrap in some other > demos of flask, and it looked reasonably attractive without being too > over the top. web2py's DAL seems fairly straight-forward too. Looks > like I may have to get more fluent in CSS & javascript, though...
If you just use web2py to implement the database calls and business logic, and to implement a simple, clean API (RPC really) for the clients to talk to, then you can still use your non-web UI tools like PyQt. But as an added bonus you can do a web interface as well. You'll have flexibility either way. A client is a client, whether it's web-bases and running on the same server, or a remote app using RPC over HTTP. I think all web-based apps should expose a web service (an API). that way you have flexibility to do a variety of front-ends. Normal web browser, mobile browser, a standalone app (think android or iphone). As far as doing client/server stuff with just a database engine, unless you have tight control over the environment end to end, from a security pov, it's not a good idea to expose the database engine itself to the internet. Better to put a restricted web services API in front of it that handles all the authorization needs (access-control) on the detailed level that you require. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
