Ahh I think I see what you're saying. It really isn't easy to develop plugins per se for web.py, but it also isn't really that easy to offload code in seperate modules (you have to hook and declare session as part of web.ctx) I do see this as more of a mini-framework, because there are things that you do end up having to figure out yourself, or modifying part of the framework not to do dumb things (like start a session/send a set-cookie header for every request, or have the db clear out only stale un-authenticated sessions).
My point is, there's a lot of stuff you do end up having to figure out for yourself, as the documentation is pretty spotty, and the results will tell you a few different ways to do any one thing depending on how old that particular revision. You really can't be afraid to get your hands dirty if you want this framework to work they way you want, and IMHO it needs more polishing. Something like django you would never dream of messing with the internals, but what drove me to web.py is the fact that it was way simpler to get something up and running. Though some things do require expierementation, like running a WSGI interface on both SSL and non-SSL ports, then adding debug interfaces to manage it from there. I don't mind though, this is the sort of thing I enjoy :), and I feel that's really in the spirit of Python in general. Ryan On May 15, 2012, at 10:21 PM, Leandro Severino <lean...@professionalit.com.br> wrote: > Ryan, > > You're right !, I want to do this, or be, modules, but I think that > plugins can be a best approach. IMHO a plugin architecture can > aggregate more value to web.py > For example, a plugin to RSS, a plugin to gallery, a plugin to > polls, a plugin to calendar/agenda, a plugin to banner publication, > but I know that this approach isn't the main goal of this framework. > The main goal of web.py to be simple and easy, but looking in the > cookbook section I see that it's so complete, ever that I seek about a > example code (to solve a problem that I have)... I have a answer in > the cookbook. > > In my country (Brazil) many python developers think that the web.py > is a mini-framework, but I don't agree with this opinion, I think that > it's very complete. > > IMHO, to be better ... it needs two things: > > 1) A standard way to develop a project with web.py, by looking in > the sources in various projects that I found in GIT(or another repo) > each project developed witg web.py follow a way, a structure, no there > a standard in the structure of a project. > 2) A plugin architecture. > > But, thank you so much ! > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "web.py" group. > To post to this group, send email to webpy@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > webpy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/webpy?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web.py" group. To post to this group, send email to webpy@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to webpy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/webpy?hl=en.
