Tutorial at Python UK, Oxford, 19 May
Michele Simionato is giving a full day tutorial titled "The Wonders of Python" at the UK Python Conference, Randolph Hotel, Oxford on 19 May. (This replaces Alex Martelli, who is now working for Google in California). https://www.accu.org/conference/python_tutorial.html This is a fantastic opportunity to boost your Python skills and catch up on the newer features of the language, for a fraction of the price of a professional training course. The course costs £135 for ACCU members and £160 for non-ACCU. There are still a few places left; anyone wishing to attend should directly contact the organisers, Archer Yates Associates, whose details are on the bottom left corner of the page. Best Regards Andy Robinson UK Python Conference program chair
Simon Faulkner wrote:
Anyone in the UK using Turbogears?
Yep, and it's pretty good too. Why do you ask? doug. -- "The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish squirting out ink" -- George Orwell, Horizon, April 1946.
Yep, and it's pretty good too. Why do you ask?
I often need to write small, simple databases and have friends 'foaming' about RoR. If TurboGears can give me pretty much what RoR would but will also allow me to use my (pathetic) Python skills then I will invest some time having a go... Sim
On Tuesday 24 January 2006 19:21, Simon Faulkner wrote:
Yep, and it's pretty good too. Why do you ask?
I often need to write small, simple databases and have friends 'foaming' about RoR.
If TurboGears can give me pretty much what RoR would but will also allow me to use my (pathetic) Python skills then I will invest some time having a go...
From what I hear/see they're pretty close. I've not used either, but having looked at both they cover the same problem space. TurboGears is also really a distribution of a bunch of (generally mature) Useful Stuff (tm) that I've seen lots of people rave about for some time (CherryPy for example). Michael.
On Tuesday 24 January 2006 19:21, Simon Faulkner wrote:
Yep, and it's pretty good too. Why do you ask?
I often need to write small, simple databases and have friends 'foaming' about RoR.
If TurboGears can give me pretty much what RoR would but will also allow me to use my (pathetic) Python skills then I will invest some time having a go...
I just gave it a go. From download to completing the 20 minute wiki, the timestamps on my filesystem say 30 minutes - I guess I read/type slow ;-) FWIW, I went to the RoR talk at Euro OSCON, and as far as I can tell (having now done the tutorial), they really are more or less equivalent. I'd definitely give it a go if I were you. I might have a bit more of a play between now and the Python Meetup Manchester[1] (hint, hint ;-) . [1] http://yeoldeclue.com/cgi-bin/blog/blog.cgi?rm=viewpost&postid=1137623603 (I'm half tempted to ditch using the port of cgi_app that I use on a handful of projects now as a result of this, *IF* it'll work on sourceforge...) Regards, Michael.
Simon Faulkner wrote:
Yep, and it's pretty good too. Why do you ask?
I often need to write small, simple databases and have friends 'foaming' about RoR.
If TurboGears can give me pretty much what RoR would but will also allow me to use my (pathetic) Python skills then I will invest some time having a go...
RoR and TG share the explict MVC model as a one-size-fits-all approach to web development, which may or may not be a bad thing depending on your application I guess. TG does seem to provide everything you need to write a complex web application, and it does provide a huge amount of the scaffolding for you. The design decisions seem to be reasonable ones, and they've taken a very pragmatic approach as far as I can tell. The KID templating language is a good one, Cherrypy has so far provided all the features i need from the environment, and I am pleasantly surprised by SQLObject. I think the great advantage of the explicit MVC model (and I believe RoR is basically the same here) is that it's very obvious where things go. MVC Is used as something of a Golden Hammer in both applications, which ultimately will lead to issues I suspect - however compared to current "enterprise" offerings (i.e Java) it's very lightly architected. Performance is acceptable, and with a postgres or mysql back-end you should be able to scale horizontally for larger applications, although I bet you'll be on the bleeding edge right now if you try that. Cheers, Doug. -- doug@isotoma.com / Isotoma, Open Source Software Consulting Tel: 020 7620 1446 / Mobile: 07879 423002 / Fax: 020 79006980 Skype: dougwinter / http://www.isotoma.com Lincoln House, 75 Westminster Bridge Road, London, SE1 7HS
RoR and TG share the explict MVC model as a one-size-fits-all approach to web development, which may or may not be a bad thing depending on your application I guess. TG does seem to provide everything you need to write a complex web application, and it does provide a huge amount of the scaffolding for you.
Ha! Just read (some of) your blog Doug and it puts a lot of stuff into perspective - ty :-) I think that a lot of my requirements are at the 'another todo' list (I laughed at that one!) What ever I decide it's got to be better than Access...
Simon Faulkner wrote:
RoR and TG share the explict MVC model as a one-size-fits-all approach to web development, which may or may not be a bad thing depending on your application I guess. TG does seem to provide everything you need to write a complex web application, and it does provide a huge amount of the scaffolding for you.
Ha! Just read (some of) your blog Doug and it puts a lot of stuff into perspective - ty :-)
I was trying to be more polite in a general email than I am on my blog :) For everyone else, Simon is referring to: http://adju.st/entry/web-frameworks-and-why-most-of-them-suck I think, where I slag off TG as well as almost everything else.
I think that a lot of my requirements are at the 'another todo' list (I laughed at that one!)
I just wrote a long response to this, and then decided it ought to be a blog entry instead, since I was planning one anyhow: http://adju.st/entry/sucky-web-frameworks-redux So consider that a reply to this :)
What ever I decide it's got to be better than Access...
Oh yes. doug. -- doug@isotoma.com / Isotoma, Open Source Software Consulting Tel: 020 7620 1446 / Mobile: 07879 423002 / Fax: 020 79006980 Skype: dougwinter / http://www.isotoma.com Lincoln House, 75 Westminster Bridge Road, London, SE1 7HS
I feel like the guy on the Fast Show picking his football team! Everytime I decide to go with a certain framework someone else makes a good case for a different one and after I faff around for weeks I end up writing it in 2 days in naked Python cgi LOL
Simon Faulkner <simon@titanic.co.uk> wrote:
I feel like the guy on the Fast Show picking his football team!
Everytime I decide to go with a certain framework someone else makes a good case for a different one and after I faff around for weeks I end up writing it in 2 days in naked Python cgi LOL
You sound like the sort of person who should be using the one I wrote, http://jonpy.sf.net/ ;-) It's designed to be lightweight and easy to use as well as powerful (it's very simple, nothing like the complexity of Zope etc). Just a quick plug ;-)
You sound like the sort of person who should be using the one I wrote, http://jonpy.sf.net/ ;-) It's designed to be lightweight and easy to use as well as powerful (it's very simple, nothing like the complexity of Zope etc).
Just a quick plug ;-)
LOL - you should be on Parkinson with a plug like that! I'm just reading the site now. Are you going to the Manchester do? I would love a quick chat about it... Sim
Simon Faulkner <simon@titanic.co.uk> wrote:
You sound like the sort of person who should be using the one I wrote, http://jonpy.sf.net/ ;-) It's designed to be lightweight and easy to use as well as powerful (it's very simple, nothing like the complexity of Zope etc).
Just a quick plug ;-)
LOL - you should be on Parkinson with a plug like that!
I think he just does books, not software :-p If I do say so myself, it does have some neat features, a transport-independent Servlet-style web application API, and the templating system has some ideas I have not seen anywhere else (including bloody-obvious ones like always HTML-encoding output by default that I think it's disgraceful they don't all do).
Are you going to the Manchester do? I would love a quick chat about it...
Sorry, too far for me (I live in London).
On 25/01/06, Jon Ribbens <jon+python-uk@unequivocal.co.uk> wrote:
You sound like the sort of person who should be using the one I wrote, http://jonpy.sf.net/ ;-) It's designed to be lightweight and easy to use as well as powerful (it's very simple, nothing like the complexity of Zope etc).
IIRC, jonpy supports fastcgi amongst other things. I read a good piece about fastcgi not too long ago: http://tinyurl.com/a6uuf -- Mamading Ceesay "Isn't a state that keeps files on innocent persons a police state?" -- David Mery - Innocent In London http://gizmonaut.net/bits/suspect.html Radio Interview with David Mery http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2005/09/6963.php
Mamading Ceesay <mamading@gmail.com> wrote:
IIRC, jonpy supports fastcgi amongst other things. I read a good piece about fastcgi not too long ago:
Yes, it lets you write your code once and run it without change using CGI, mod_python or FastCGI. I (or anyone) could make it do SCGI too but I've never heard of anyone using that.
Doug, I've read your blog and your replies here with great interest. The points you make about understanding and progress are very interesting. No wonder [some] people think Zope sucks because Acquisition is so difficult to grok; but now after having understood its power I feel this is one of Zope's best feature. The reason I didn't give up was because I had a friend whom I trusted that I persist. If it wasn't for him I would probably have avoided zope quite early. I'm wondering Doug, what's your take on zope3 vs. TG? On 1/25/06, Doug Winter <doug@isotoma.com> wrote:
Simon Faulkner wrote:
RoR and TG share the explict MVC model as a one-size-fits-all approach to web development, which may or may not be a bad thing depending on your application I guess. TG does seem to provide everything you need to write a complex web application, and it does provide a huge amount of the scaffolding for you.
Ha! Just read (some of) your blog Doug and it puts a lot of stuff into perspective - ty :-)
I was trying to be more polite in a general email than I am on my blog :) For everyone else, Simon is referring to:
http://adju.st/entry/web-frameworks-and-why-most-of-them-suck
I think, where I slag off TG as well as almost everything else.
I think that a lot of my requirements are at the 'another todo' list (I laughed at that one!)
I just wrote a long response to this, and then decided it ought to be a blog entry instead, since I was planning one anyhow:
http://adju.st/entry/sucky-web-frameworks-redux
So consider that a reply to this :)
What ever I decide it's got to be better than Access...
Oh yes.
doug.
-- doug@isotoma.com / Isotoma, Open Source Software Consulting Tel: 020 7620 1446 / Mobile: 07879 423002 / Fax: 020 79006980 Skype: dougwinter / http://www.isotoma.com Lincoln House, 75 Westminster Bridge Road, London, SE1 7HS _______________________________________________ python-uk mailing list python-uk@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
-- Peter Bengtsson, work www.fry-it.com home www.peterbe.com hobby www.issuetrackerproduct.com
Peter Bengtsson wrote:
I've read your blog and your replies here with great interest. The points you make about understanding and progress are very interesting. No wonder [some] people think Zope sucks because Acquisition is so difficult to grok; but now after having understood its power I feel this is one of Zope's best feature. The reason I didn't give up was because I had a friend whom I trusted that I persist. If it wasn't for him I would probably have avoided zope quite early.
Hi Peter - I knew someone would defend Zope, should have guessed it would be you :) I don't think difficulty of grokking is the problem with Acquisition really. I think it's a good attempt at solving a real problem that ultimately creates more problems than it solves. The problem acquisition tries to solve is a real issue - how do you provide "context" in a web application? Zope satisfies these requirements using Acquisition. My problem with it is that it is too promiscuous - your namespace ends up massively polluted, leading to name collision between multiple products. I spend a lot of my time working with Zope and this leads to real issues - only yesterday I had two products that had coincidentally named a method the same (one as a method one as a PythonScript) leading to bizarre failures when one acquired the other's version of the method. Ultimately I think Acquisition is a Glorious Failure - it was a brave attempt to solve a difficult problem, but it just doesn't scale. Zope Corp have realised this, and Zope 3 is fundamentally different, using Adaptation instead of Acquisition to provide a mechanism for object location.
I'm wondering Doug, what's your take on zope3 vs. TG?
Zope 3 looks very good - they've fundamentally addressed the core architectural problems in Zope 2. I seriously dislike the XML configuration files, which might seem like a minor point but it really gets on my nerves. Zope 3 has a head start on the other frameworks like TG, in that there is a large body of existing code (such as CMF) which can be ported to it from Zope 2. Lots of that code is very crufty and horrible though, so how much of an advantage that is depends a lot on the extent of any rewriting that goes on I guess. TG is going to be using RuleDispatch instead of Adaptation, which is going to be really interesting. I have no idea how well that's going to pan out in actual use. There have been a lot of complaints about the diversity of web solutions for Python, as opposed to Ruby where there is just the one, as if somehow it was a bad thing. It may be confusing for newcomers, but I can't honestly believe that the genetic diversity of solutions, all able to take the best of each other's ideas, can be anything other than a very good thing. Cheers, Doug. -- doug@isotoma.com / Isotoma, Open Source Software Consulting Tel: 020 7620 1446 / Mobile: 07879 423002 / Fax: 020 79006980 Skype: dougwinter / http://www.isotoma.com Lincoln House, 75 Westminster Bridge Road, London, SE1 7HS
Oh dear. I've been investing lots of time recently in Rails. Now I find out TG is just as good and its in the language I know. On 1/26/06, Doug Winter <doug@isotoma.com> wrote:
Peter Bengtsson wrote:
I've read your blog and your replies here with great interest. The points you make about understanding and progress are very interesting. No wonder [some] people think Zope sucks because Acquisition is so difficult to grok; but now after having understood its power I feel this is one of Zope's best feature. The reason I didn't give up was because I had a friend whom I trusted that I persist. If it wasn't for him I would probably have avoided zope quite early.
Hi Peter - I knew someone would defend Zope, should have guessed it would be you :)
I don't think difficulty of grokking is the problem with Acquisition really. I think it's a good attempt at solving a real problem that ultimately creates more problems than it solves. The problem acquisition tries to solve is a real issue - how do you provide "context" in a web application?
Zope satisfies these requirements using Acquisition. My problem with it is that it is too promiscuous - your namespace ends up massively polluted, leading to name collision between multiple products.
I spend a lot of my time working with Zope and this leads to real issues - only yesterday I had two products that had coincidentally named a method the same (one as a method one as a PythonScript) leading to bizarre failures when one acquired the other's version of the method.
Ultimately I think Acquisition is a Glorious Failure - it was a brave attempt to solve a difficult problem, but it just doesn't scale. Zope Corp have realised this, and Zope 3 is fundamentally different, using Adaptation instead of Acquisition to provide a mechanism for object location.
I'm wondering Doug, what's your take on zope3 vs. TG?
Zope 3 looks very good - they've fundamentally addressed the core architectural problems in Zope 2. I seriously dislike the XML configuration files, which might seem like a minor point but it really gets on my nerves.
Zope 3 has a head start on the other frameworks like TG, in that there is a large body of existing code (such as CMF) which can be ported to it from Zope 2. Lots of that code is very crufty and horrible though, so how much of an advantage that is depends a lot on the extent of any rewriting that goes on I guess.
TG is going to be using RuleDispatch instead of Adaptation, which is going to be really interesting. I have no idea how well that's going to pan out in actual use.
There have been a lot of complaints about the diversity of web solutions for Python, as opposed to Ruby where there is just the one, as if somehow it was a bad thing. It may be confusing for newcomers, but I can't honestly believe that the genetic diversity of solutions, all able to take the best of each other's ideas, can be anything other than a very good thing.
Cheers,
Doug.
-- doug@isotoma.com / Isotoma, Open Source Software Consulting Tel: 020 7620 1446 / Mobile: 07879 423002 / Fax: 020 79006980 Skype: dougwinter / http://www.isotoma.com Lincoln House, 75 Westminster Bridge Road, London, SE1 7HS _______________________________________________ python-uk mailing list python-uk@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
-- Wisdom is the reward you get for a lifetime of listening when you'd have preferred to talk.
Doug Bromley wrote:
Oh dear. I've been investing lots of time recently in Rails. Now I find out TG is just as good and its in the language I know.
My own 2p worth is that Django is also excellent and 'does what it says on the tin'. Unfortunately it was sufficiently good that my resolution to do the same app in both and give them equal learning time fizzled out halfway. In particular Django's admin interface ROCKS - it saved weeks on a project already and wowed a customer. - Andy Robinson
On 26/01/06, Doug Winter <doug@isotoma.com> wrote:
There have been a lot of complaints about the diversity of web solutions for Python, as opposed to Ruby where there is just the one, as if somehow it was a bad thing. It may be confusing for newcomers, but I can't honestly believe that the genetic diversity of solutions, all able to take the best of each other's ideas, can be anything other than a very good thing.
The friendly competition between Django and TurboGears has been good for both of them as they have each moved to close the perceived gaps in functionality vs the other. It is also causing other (emerging) frameworks to raise their game (all I'm saying that some very interesting conversation can be had at the London Python Meetups!). -- Mamading Ceesay "Isn't a state that keeps files on innocent persons a police state?" -- David Mery - Innocent In London http://gizmonaut.net/bits/suspect.html Radio Interview with David Mery http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2005/09/6963.php
On 25/01/06, Doug Winter <doug@isotoma.com> wrote:
I just wrote a long response to this, and then decided it ought to be a blog entry instead, since I was planning one anyhow:
Knowing something of your history with Zope and more recently with Twisted, I was quite surprised to read this. I guess it's more evidence to back Alastair Cockburn's thesis that software development is a cooperative game ( http://tinyurl.com/ex2pz ). If you can't get other developers to cooperate with you due to your choice of framework, changing your framework is the socially sound thing to do even if it is a backward step architecturally. Of course, you can go too far with that sort of thing and wind up coding PHP! ;-) -- Mamading Ceesay "Isn't a state that keeps files on innocent persons a police state?" -- David Mery - Innocent In London http://gizmonaut.net/bits/suspect.html Radio Interview with David Mery http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2005/09/6963.php
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006, Mamading Ceesay wrote:
On 25/01/06, Doug Winter <doug@isotoma.com> wrote: [...]
Knowing something of your history with Zope and more recently with Twisted, I was quite surprised to read this. I guess it's more evidence to back Alastair Cockburn's thesis that software development is a cooperative game ( http://tinyurl.com/ex2pz ). If you can't get other developers to cooperate with you due to your choice of framework, changing your framework is the socially sound thing to do even if it is a backward step architecturally. Of course, you can go too far with that sort of thing and wind up coding PHP! ;-)
"...all progress depends on the unreasonable man." -- George Bernard Shaw John
On 28/01/06, John J Lee <jjl@pobox.com> wrote:
"...all progress depends on the unreasonable man." -- George Bernard Shaw
Too true. Unfortunately unreasonable men often find plenty of knives and arrows in their back. -- Mamading Ceesay "Isn't a state that keeps files on innocent persons a police state?" -- David Mery - Innocent In London http://gizmonaut.net/bits/suspect.html Radio Interview with David Mery http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2005/09/6963.php
On 25/01/06, Doug Winter <doug@isotoma.com> wrote:
I think the great advantage of the explicit MVC model (and I believe RoR is basically the same here) is that it's very obvious where things go.
Absolutely spot-on!
Performance is acceptable, and with a postgres or mysql back-end you should be able to scale horizontally for larger applications, although I bet you'll be on the bleeding edge right now if you try that.
Perhaps. Remi (of CherryPy fame) does have an enterprise deployment of a CherryPy based web app that's been in production for years. Said deployment happens to be down the road from me incidentally. -- Mamading Ceesay "Isn't a state that keeps files on innocent persons a police state?" -- David Mery - Innocent In London http://gizmonaut.net/bits/suspect.html Radio Interview with David Mery http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2005/09/6963.php
participants (10)
-
Andy Robinson -
Doug Bromley -
Doug Winter -
Doug Winter -
John J Lee -
Jon Ribbens -
Mamading Ceesay -
Michael -
Peter Bengtsson -
Simon Faulkner