I think that is an excellent idea. Given that I am on the apps end
of the Jython dev spectrum folks might think "well, he would say
that wouldn't he" but please hear me out.
In order to make compelling-end-user-app Django/Turbogears/Plone (whatever)
work well, lots and lots of stuff will need to be done at the jython
Charles's suggestion creates a *reason* for doing this work that can
be explained to non-technical people. This is very important for
a lot of technical people who need to "sell" the idea of them spending
time on Jython in order to get the time/space to do so.
"We are making Django/Turbogears/Plone (whatever) work in
an enterprise application server environment" is one such phrase :-)
It might even help me in the not-too-distant future make a case
at my shop for some resources to spend time on Jython.
What compelling application to focus on? Well, personally I don't
use relational database-y stuff very much being genetically a dochead.
However, I think a compelling case can be made for saying
that the compelling application should be relational database-y in nature.
After all (a) the majority of "normal" developers spend their days there
there is lots of Java sprayed over those sort of environments at
that could benefit greatly from some Jython.
Mind-share is another important factor of course. The least risky path
is to pick an app that already has a bandwagon rather than try
to form a new one.
With that in mind, I would suggest that the focus should be
either Django or TurboGears.
My 2 cent(Euro),
Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
> I understand that you guys are trying to aim for Python compatibility as
> a general goal, and I think that's very admirable. It is obviously the
> ultimate goal, as is Ruby compatibility for JRuby. I do have a concern
> though, and a little story.
> JRuby development was largely dead when I joined the project in late
> 2004. The primary goal at the time was the simple, boring goal of Ruby
> 1.8 compatibility. And although that was the right direction to be
> moving, it was a pretty boring goal. Nobody really cared about running
> edge cases and patching bugs for features they weren't using, so no work
> was being done.
> In late 2005, however, I decided things should start moving in a
> different direction: toward specific application support. Rather than
> the general goal of Ruby compatibility, it seemed like a much more
> exciting and compelling idea to try to make real-world Ruby apps run in
> JRuby. The first app was IRB, Ruby's interactive shell. After that,
> things started to move very quickly; people saw that there was more to
> JRuby than simple "Ruby compatibility"...there was the potential to run
> all those amazing Ruby apps under JRuby as well. That's when things
> really started moving.
> I think Jython should consider a similar approach. Just supporting
> Python is not enough of a goal to compel folks to contribute precious
> off-hours to the project. Working toward support for apps like Django
> would do a lot more for publicity and project interest.
> Since changing the direction on JRuby, we've presented at JavaOne and
> other conferences, had paid-for speaking engagements, publishers begging
> us to do a JRuby book, and of course the Sun hiring. Supporting a
> language is good, but setting a goal to support compelling, real-world
> apps is much more exciting.
> Might this be a good way to raise interest in Jython? A better concrete
> goal that people can get excited about?