ZODB: Quixote vs. Twisted
peter at engcorp.com
Wed Apr 2 04:37:42 CEST 2003
"A.M. Kuchling" wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 13:58:42 +0200,
> Thomas Guettler <pan-newsreader at thomas-guettler.de> wrote:
> > I think about moving from Zope to
> > ZODB and (Quixote or Twisted).
> You're mixing levels here. ZODB is an object database; Zope is for content
> manager and application development, built on top of that object database.
> Twisted is a framework for writing network services; Quixote is a framework
> for writing HTTP/web applications, and can be hosted on top of Medusa or
> Twisted. (See the March archive of the quixote-users list for some example
> code to run Quixote applications on top of Twisted.)
> So the choices are more like:
> ZODB or SQL
> Apache or AOLserver or Twisted or Medusa
> Quixote or Zope or Webware or ...
> Zope provides content management features that Quixote and Webware don't.
> You could write a content manager in Quixote or Webware, but no one has done
> so yet, as far as I know.
Just a small adjustment: Twisted (as in twisted.web) definitely covers
much more of Zope than just the Medusa part. In fact, there seems
to be a remarkably small amout (just that related to actual *content
management*, as far as I can tell) which it does not at least begin
to cover, if not cover better and more elegantly than Zope (IMHO).
That doesn't mean it can (yet?) compete with Zope in the majority
of Zope's areas of application, but then I think many people think
Zope is more readily applied to some simple situations than it really
turns out to be. Twisted, on the other hand, can handle at least
those areas significantly more easily than Zope can.
Not sure where Quixote fits in yet...
More information about the Python-list