| | |
|---|
| | | we just file the challenge as "noted", as obviously you can't please |
|---|
| | | everyone all of the time. |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | Pyramid Has Zope Things In It, So It's Too Complex |
|---|
| | | -------------------------------------------------- |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | On occasion, someone will feel compelled to post a mailing list message that |
|---|
| | | read something like this:: |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | had a quick look at pyramid ... too complex to me and not really |
|---|
| | | understand for which benefits.. I feel should consider whether it's time |
|---|
| | | for me to step back to django .. I always hated zope (useless ?) |
|---|
| | | complexity and I love simple way of thinking |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | (Paraphrased from a real email, actually.) |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | Let's take this criticism point-by point. |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | Too Complex |
|---|
| | | +++++++++++ |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | - If you can understand this hello world program, you can use Pyramid:: |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | from paste.httpserver import serve |
|---|
| | | from pyramid.configuration import Configurator |
|---|
| | | from pyramid.response import Response |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | def hello_world(request): |
|---|
| | | return Response('Hello world!') |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | if __name__ == '__main__': |
|---|
| | | config = Configurator() |
|---|
| | | config.begin() |
|---|
| | | config.add_view(hello_world) |
|---|
| | | config.end() |
|---|
| | | app = config.make_wsgi_app() |
|---|
| | | serve(app) |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | - Pyramid is 5,000 lines of runtime code. Pylons 1.0 has about 3,000 lines |
|---|
| | | of runtime code. Django has about 60,000 lines of runtime code. You'd |
|---|
| | | practically need to bend the laws of space and time for Django to be |
|---|
| | | simpler than Pyramid. |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | - It has 600 or more pages of documentation (printed), covering topics from |
|---|
| | | the very basic to the most advanced. *Nothing* is left undocumented, quite |
|---|
| | | literally. |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | - It has an *awesome*, very helpful community. Visit the #repoze and/or |
|---|
| | | #pylons IRC channels on freenode.net and see. |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | Hate Zope |
|---|
| | | +++++++++ |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | I'm sorry you feel that way. The Zope brand has certainly taken its share of |
|---|
| | | lumps over the years, and has a reputation for being insular and mysterious. |
|---|
| | | But the word "Zope" is literally quite meaningless without qualification. |
|---|
| | | What *part* of Zope do you hate? "Zope" is a brand, not a technology. |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | If it's Zope2-the-web-framework, Pyramid is not that. The primary designers |
|---|
| | | and developers of Pyramid, if anyone, should know. We wrote Pyramid's |
|---|
| | | predecessor (:mod:`repoze.bfg`), in part, because *we* knew that Zope 2 had |
|---|
| | | usability issues and limitations. :mod:`repoze.bfg` (and now :mod:`pyramid`) |
|---|
| | | was written to address these issues. |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | If it's Zope3-the-web-framework, Pyramid is *definitely* not that. Making |
|---|
| | | use of lots of Zope 3 technologies is territory already staked out by the |
|---|
| | | :term:`Grok` project. Save for the obvious fact that they're both web |
|---|
| | | frameworks, :mod:`Pyramid` is very, very different than Grok. Grok exposes |
|---|
| | | lots of Zope technologies to end users. On the other hand, if you need to |
|---|
| | | understand a Zope-only concept while using Pyramid, then we've failed on some |
|---|
| | | very basic axis. |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | If it's just the word Zope: it's, charitably, only guilt by association. You |
|---|
| | | need to understand that just because a piece of software internally uses some |
|---|
| | | package named ``zope.foo``, it doesn't turn the piece of software that uses |
|---|
| | | it into "Zope". There is a lot of *great* software written that has the word |
|---|
| | | Zope in its name. Zope is not some sort of monolithic thing, and a lot of |
|---|
| | | its software is usable externally. |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | Zope Is Useless |
|---|
| | | +++++++++++++++ |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | It's not really the job of this document to defend Zope. But Zope has been |
|---|
| | | around for over 10 years and has an incredibly large, active community. If |
|---|
| | | you don't believe this, http://taichino.appspot.com/pypi_ranking/authors is |
|---|
| | | an eye-opening reality check. |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | Love Simplicity |
|---|
| | | +++++++++++++++ |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | Years of effort have gone into honing this package and its documentation to |
|---|
| | | make it as simple as humanly possible for developers to use. Everything is a |
|---|
| | | tradeoff, of course, and people have their own ideas about what "simple" is. |
|---|
| | | You may have a style difference if you believe Pyramid is complex. Its |
|---|
| | | developers obviously disagree. |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
| | | Pyramid Uses A Zope Component Architecture ("ZCA") Registry |
|---|
| | | ----------------------------------------------------------- |
|---|
| | | |
|---|
