Pythonic way of web-programming

[Giorgi]

Ian Bicking <ianb at colorstudy.com> wrote in message news:<mailman.1049571010.25625.python-list at python.org>...
> On Sat, 2003-04-05 at 12:49, Giorgi wrote:
> > The question is that the only way to establish Python as a language
> > for corporate level web-programming is to have the standard approach
> > if not introduced, then at least supported by the Python consortium...
> 
> I don't think that's entirely true.  It's difficult for *Python* to be a
> language for certain areas of web programming (perhaps corporate), but
> certain Python environments could still achieve that.  The corporation
> would choose an environment, not a language, and if a good environment
> is written in Python then indirectly they'll have chosen Python.
> 

That's what I wanted to say.

> But I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice to have more cohesion... that's
> just not the way it is now.  It's harder to make it happen, because
> unlike Java or .NET, the Python community is not a top-down community. 
> Guido has some authority, but I think he's almost as much a decision
> process as a decider -- he decides on things where there's some level of
> consensus in the community, and doesn't make dictates otherwise.  The
> standard library has some authority, but its fairly neutral on these
> things.  Besides that there's no authority at the moment.
> 
Well, maybe we should establish an advisory board? :)

The issue is that an experoenced programmer will hardly ever change
his favorite framework; however, a newbie will have a standard
starting point. I am not a web-programmer and the only reason I went
relatively deep is my task to make a Georgian-language based site for
Python. I have a standard cgi module. At least it's there, but...

Therefore, I don't think that the consensus of the whole Python
community is really required...

> The next step I can envision would be for Twisted to become the
> canonical infrastructure, where higher-level web frameworks are all
> built ontop of it.  In that way we can start to build consensus one
> piece at a time.
> 

Ok, but who is (are) taking over?