"Some people are not interested in features as are only interested in learning the system that will give them the highest chance of getting hired. Some people are interested in features as a way to get the job done better and quicker. I am working for this second class of users. I am interested in building a community for these people.
Massimo" What you are describing is a SWOT (strength, weakness, opportunity, threats) analysis. S: - works with existing DB's with minimal restrictions. - Provides WWW std outputs (RSS, XML, etc) - DAL to abstract away DB complexity. - GAE friendly. - High level of customization possible. - Appliances to do plug and play. - Built in ticketing. - etc. W: - Python powered. (Rankles me too, but Python is usually not the first language uttered when discussing web platforms even with Django's popularity.) - Minimal third party tools. - Fear of 'death by truck' for the framework. - Development is outpacing documentation. O: - DAL possibly support schemeless DB's (CouchDB or BerkelyDB)? (future?) - Ability to run in a Android environment. - General portability of the framework. T: - Not in the top three in their language class as a framework. - PHP on the low end. Django/Rails in the midrange. Java/Glassfish/ JBoss/PlOne/Zodb on the high end. Least that is what I would report to my boss were he to ask. And please I did this as impartial as I could. For example 'minimal third party tools' would be valid complaint. The counter argument of course is many tools are already built in and anything one could consider lacking could be developed or modified from existing tools. Were I to make one recommendation for a feature -- Make the DAL capable of inter-operating with CouchDB. Rationale -- * CouchDB is an up and comer in the DB arena. It plays into the BigTable and S3 space as a substitute for those that need to keep data inhouse. * CouchDB has a simple interface and there are tools that permit one to integrate django to CouchDB. But it is tacked on. A seamless interface between Web2Py and CouchDB would be a reasonable first for any framework. * One would garner more support from the Mozilla Foundation in the way of recognition and public relations than one might get from Google. Just one opinion. JohnMc On Jul 6, 3:13 pm, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote: > I understand what you are trying to say but when you say "no one is > using web2py" gives people the wrong impression and not the correct > one. It is not fair to member of this community who use web2py. > > You should also assume that there are lots of people on this list who > are considering web2py but have not yet made their mind about it. <snip> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py Web Framework" group. To post to this group, send email to web2py@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
