On Sat, 2003-03-01 at 13:59, Edmund Lian wrote:
> >WebKit: Python Application Server
> >MiddleKit: Object Abstraction Layer (I guess)
> ><insert name here>Kit: <insert name here> handling utilities
> >However, I do not feel the site/docs/whatever presents it quite this
> >way. There are notes such as "Don't know where to start? Try WebKit",
> >but I do not believe that portrays things accurately.
> There's more than a grain of truth to this. When I started using Webware, I
> too tripped over this. While the confusion goes away after a couple of
> weeks, what's the point of confusing people this way to begin with?
True. Some people may just use MK, but if they do so it's probably
because they heard about it somewhere else -- they wouldn't see the name
"Webware" and think "database wrapper". Anyone who comes to Webware is
looking to do web applications, and WebKit should absolutely be the
center of their attention.
If there are other kits that are useful and usable outside of Webware --
currently only MiddleKit -- then they should advertise separately if you
want people to see them (whether or not they are packaged separately).
But obscuring the central role of WebKit (through naming or otherwise)
doesn't emphasize their existence any better.
Would it be sufficient if "Webware Documentation" was synonymous with
WebKit documentation, and everything else was under a Webware Components
section? And I think people who want to use MK would be much more
likely to find it if it was distributed as a separate package -- PyDO,
for instance, was distributed separately then only distributed as part
of SkunkWeb, and went back to separate distribution by demand. MK is
very similar, and as long as it doesn't depend on Webware it should be
possible to attain without Webware.