I'd like to weigh in on these comments. routes.py: - It seems to me that Django routes are just as complicated: http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.1/intro/overview/#design-your-urls - Providing the routes.py outside of an app makes sense for web2py since it directly maps app/controller/function to a url. This decision was made to make things clear and understandable for new developers.
Chinese URLs: - perhaps you could have written a patch? - (more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internationalizing_Domain_Names_in_Applications) Standalone Apps: - sessions can "master" to another application to tie them together. - I use routes to unify all my static content to one app location. Slow Boot: - How often do you restart web2py? It can work as a CGI but only as a stop-gap measure. Any web-developer worth his salt would run a framework in FCGI or WSGI mode. - I don't really care for the import_all.py module either. Errors: - I think the error report leaves much to be desired but at present, I think we're locked in because of backward compatibility. "fighting with built-in module" <-- I'm not sure what you mean here. Too "magic": - web2py is designed to be simple. I think how web2py sets headers is appropriate. - I agree that it should set appropriate headers with regard to SSL and static files and IE. No unittests: - Creating unittests requires a culture. - the web2py doesn't seem to have that culture built into it (for better or worse) - While web2py should have unittests, web apps don't mix well with unittests. - Functional tests would be much more appropriate for a web app. Most functional tests would run in the browser anyway (e.g. Qunit) "DAL is bad than SQLAlchemy": - This a subjective statement - The DAL is not as well-tested or as widely-used as SQLAlchemy. But it is good enough for the vast majority of web2py users. - The DAL supports migration, SQLAlchemy does not. - The DAL has a cleaner (IMHO) declaration syntax and an uglier query syntax when compared to SQLAlchemy. MVC is insulated: - I'm not sure what you mean here. - Yes they are all in the same namespace. How is this a problem? It's a bummer to see you and your team go. We wish you the best. -tim On 2/4/2010 7:39 AM, Zoom.Quiet wrote: > just last week this team to decide by vote to give up web2py, usage > Django develping; > > reasons:: > - bad routes.py > - changeless pattern for URL had to base routes.py redirect into short URL > - routes.py is out app > > - url can not understand Chinese > > - tooo stand alone app > - session/static ... is all srand alone > - can not easy base app slpit site's components > > - tooo slow boot > - import tooo many lib > > - error report is tooo ugly > - can not support debug easy! > > - fighting with build-in module > - > https://groups.google.com/group/web2py/browse_thread/thread/e20d0bd2e542aa14/a660bac70d5611a4 > - can work with logging > > - tooo magic > - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1999950/download-link-fails-in-ie > - auto work in background,but not all clean > > - NULL unittest support! > > - DAL is bad than SQLAlchemy > > - MVC is insulated! > - model/control/view all variable is in same name space > > > ONLY two feeling good: > - deployment is stand alone > - but usage yolk+virtualenv others web app. framework also can > deplotment stand alone > - built-in crontab task support > > > PS: > translate from: "Mage from hell: 说说 web2py" > http://blog.hellmage.info/2010/02/web2py.html > > PPS: > hope mdipierro fixed these bad feeling for developer in time; > make web2py become realy ent. web app. workframe > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py-users" group. To post to this group, send email to web...@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.
