Ian Bicking wrote:
> I agree -- I don't think a Webware book would work. In fact, I don't
> think Python is ready for any web programming books
It's very ready..but what should that book look like? Personally, I
really like Steve Holden's book, but it's at a low level. It has the
stuff I need to understand to be able to someday work with the internals
of a package like Webware, but if you want to just put a site together,
the publishing world makes it look like ZOPE or straight CGI is your
> or just
> cover one framework under the guise of being general. There was one
> that covered Slither, I think... ever heard of Slither?
I think Slither was pretty much written for the book, as was Holden's
AWeFUL, although Holden was quite clear that AWeFUL was meant to be a
teaching example, not a robust framework.
> The reality is that Python web programming is a fucking mess. It's
> pathetic. There's no way to write a book, because there's no material
> that's appropriate book material.
I think this is a chicken-egg thing. Books are used by the general
public as a way to gage the viability of something. The fact that there
are a lot of Python books helps a lot of folks see it as viable.
Also, I don't think one could just write a Webware book with Webware as
it stands. Writing the book would help highlight a LOT of places that
Webware needs to be cleaned-up, improved, added-to, etc. It doesn't have
to a be a whole book, any one chapter in the Wiki will help.
> I like Webware, but it's not going to
> take over the world, not even the modest Python world.
It doesn't need to take over the world. Frankly, I had a very hard time
choosing between Quixote, CherryPy, Albatross, Webware, etc, etc. If Any
of these had really comprehensive documentation (i.e., a book), I'd have
gone with it.
> All the
> other frameworks are in the same shape as Webware -- they have some
> users, occasional spurts of activity. Some have solid enough
> communities to have a viable future, but many do not. None of them is
> compellingly great. Yes, even Webware.
Right, it's like the GUI frameworks, only worse. And it hurts Python
adoption a lot. Frankly, it seems to me that there are a Huge number of
frameworks that were written with a "more lightweight than Zope" goal,
and I didn't see a clear distinction. Unfortunately, I think there is
too small a barrier to entry, so a lot of people decide to roll their own.
> BTW, if anyone wants to talk about these larger issues, Web-SIG is
> probably an appropriate venue: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig
That is a good idea. Personally, I have far to little to offer. I just
want something simple, complete and documented that works.
I think I started this thread because I had a colleague who was
considering using Python to build a web app. If I could have pointed him
to a book (or a web site, I suppose, but a book gives added legitimacy)
that he could read, and it would tell him how to do everything he needed
to do, he would have used it. As it was, he found himself wading through
all the various web app frameworks out there, and then looking at a PHP
book, that told him just how do so what he needed (A fairly simple
database-backed web app.)
I have a level of commitment to Python that got me this far, but I'd
really like that book too!
Shayne ONeill wrote:
> I wonder if its worth writing a "good" chapter on webware, and hawking it
> out to the book venders for inclusion in whatever python tome they come
> out with next?
Well, that could help, but it might just contribute to the "There's more
than one way to do it" state of web development with Python.
Todd Grimason wrote:
> Seems one group just
> needs to make a kick-ass framework, push it hard, and build support,
> Darwin (the guy not OS) style. Not an easy thing to do... but not
Exactly. It's hard without the profit motive...Open source projects tend
to get to the point where they are useful to their developers
easily...getting beyond that is tough. What's the motivation?
Anyway, the recent work on updated the web site, and getting new stuff
in a nice Wiki is a great move in the right direction. If we really keep
building the wiki, it could turn into a good basis for a book some day.
Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
NOAA/OR&R/HAZMAT (206) 526-6959 voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax
Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception