Python blogging software

2006-09-13 Thread Cliff Wells
There's been a lot of blogs started in Python, but given the recent spate of web frameworks, I'm surprised that some blogging package hasn't taken front seat yet. I'm currently using Frog, and it's decent, but lacks some fundamental features (tags for one). Since Irmen is probably going to scrap

Re: Python blogging software

2006-09-13 Thread Cliff Wells
On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 00:29 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote: > Anyone aware of any functional (doesn't need to be complete, beta is > fine) blog software written in Python? Hmph. And as soon as I hit send I find http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonBlogSoftware Okay, so is there any *not* on that lis

Re: Python blogging software

2006-09-13 Thread Fuzzyman
Cliff Wells wrote: > On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 00:29 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote: > > > Anyone aware of any functional (doesn't need to be complete, beta is > > fine) blog software written in Python? > > Hmph. And as soon as I hit send I find > > http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonBlogSoftware > > Okay,

Re: Python blogging software

2006-09-13 Thread Irmen de Jong
Cliff Wells wrote: > I'm currently using Frog, and it's decent, but lacks some fundamental > features (tags for one). Since Irmen is probably going to scrap it > anyway, I'm kind of fishing about for something new. That is not really true. I won't "scrap" Frog. One of the reasons would be that I'

Re: Python blogging software

2006-09-13 Thread Pierre Quentel
Hi, There is a blog demo in Karrigell : http://karrigell.sourceforge.net There is a project called KarriBlog aiming to offer a more complete application, it's still beta but you can see it working on this site (in French) : http://www.salvatore.exolia.net/site Regards, Pierre -- http://mail.py

Re: Python blogging software

2006-09-13 Thread Cliff Wells
On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 08:22 -0700, Fuzzyman wrote: > Cliff Wells wrote: > > On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 00:29 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote: > > > > > Anyone aware of any functional (doesn't need to be complete, beta is > > > fine) blog software written in Python? > > > > Hmph. And as soon as I hit send I fi

Re: Python blogging software

2006-09-13 Thread Fuzzyman
Cliff Wells wrote: > On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 08:22 -0700, Fuzzyman wrote: > > Cliff Wells wrote: > > > On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 00:29 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote: > > > > > > > Anyone aware of any functional (doesn't need to be complete, beta is > > > > fine) blog software written in Python? > > > > > > H

Re: Python blogging software

2006-09-14 Thread Cliff Wells
On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 19:28 +0200, Irmen de Jong wrote: > Cliff Wells wrote: > > I'm currently using Frog, and it's decent, but lacks some fundamental > > features (tags for one). Since Irmen is probably going to scrap it > > anyway, I'm kind of fishing about for something new. > > That is not re

Re: Python blogging software

2006-09-16 Thread Eric S. Johansson
Fuzzyman wrote: > > Because it is client side (rather than running on the server), it has > no built in comments facility. I use Haloscan for comments, but I'm > always on the look out for a neat comments system to integrate with > Firedrop. > > I personally prefer the 'client side' approach, as

Re: Python blogging software

2006-09-16 Thread Paul Rubin
"Eric S. Johansson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > a wise person you are. I've often thought that most of the pages > generated by web frameworks (except for active pages) should be cached > once rendered. Fancy frameworks do use caching, but I think of that as a kludgy workaround for lousy perfor

Re: Python blogging software

2006-09-17 Thread Steve Holden
Paul Rubin wrote: > "Eric S. Johansson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>a wise person you are. I've often thought that most of the pages >>generated by web frameworks (except for active pages) should be cached >>once rendered. > > > Fancy frameworks do use caching, but I think of that as a klud

Re: Python blogging software

2006-09-17 Thread Paul Rubin
Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Fancy frameworks do use caching, but I think of that as a kludgy > > workaround for lousy performance of the framework itself. A fast > > framework should not need caching, except maybe caching gzip output > > for large blocks of contiguous text. > The

Re: Python blogging software

2006-09-17 Thread Diez B. Roggisch
> Fair enough. I shouldn't have said "lousy performance of the > framework itself" when I should have included the application. If the > application's page computations are so lengthy, then they too need > speeding up. > > We've got a situation where some big sites (Slashdot, Wikipedia) have >