From: Randall S. <ra...@tn...> - 2004-03-25 04:54:05
|
I am working on a project in which I have chosen to use xmlrpc. As I set out to look for an app server, I wanted one that would allow code changes without restarting the process(es) and one that is non-blocking. I considered building my own from the Python standard library, and I considered twisted. I'm not comfortable with twisted's deffered solution for writing non-blocking code, and neither solution would let me easily manage the server and reload modules, etc. I had used Webware before for building a website and thought it sure would be nice if Webware did XMLRPC. And lo and behold, to my delight, it does! Multi-threaded, easily managed, dynamically realoading modules. And written in pure Python. So I'm happy. So I ponder. Why isn't Webware more aggressive as a general webservices app server. Is there a SOAP implementation? Would it be difficult to create one? Probably not much more difficult to impement than xmprpc. It seems like such a natural fit. Here are its advantages as I see them: 1. Decoupled from the webserver. Apache does a great job of managing connections. Why try to beat it? Webware focuses on the application side. 2. Multi-threaded. Although the global interpreter lock may prevent scaling on SMP machines (hence twisteds async), I've found the performance to be superb in my experience. It is very responsive while handling simultaneous requests. 3. Manageable. The web interface for managing the service is nice. Being able to reload modules with the server running means more uptime. Webware can also watch mtimes on the files to reload them when they are changed. So what else do you want in an app server? Is there a better app server that 'all the other' Pythoneers are using and I'm just missing? If not, ring the bell! Webware is such a simple and powerful framework for building web apps. It lets me program in Python (unlike Zope) and doesn't force me to use a specialized abstracted framework, but provides easy access to the things I need (http request info). So back to my question. Is Webware intended to be a webservices (web/xmlrpc/soap) app server? If not why? I understand it is not like twisted, supporting every protocol under the sun. It should not be. I think it should stay with http based protocols. But why not support them all? If the glove fits. Randall |
From: Daniel N. <ne...@te...> - 2004-03-26 03:26:32
|
Randall Smith wrote: > Being able to reload modules with the server running means more uptime. > Webware can also watch mtimes on the files to reload them when they are > changed. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this have races that can lead to devious non-reproducible bugs? IMHO a few seconds of downtime are far cheaper than hunting a bug that doesn't really exist. -- Daniel Newby |
From: Jason H. <ja...@pe...> - 2004-03-26 05:28:56
|
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 22:53, Randall Smith wrote: > So I ponder. Why isn't Webware more aggressive as a general > webservices > app server. Is there a SOAP implementation? Would it be difficult > to > create one? I think it should be quite straightforward -- there are (several?) soap implementations for python, and as far as integrating it into Webware goes, you should just be able to use the XMLRPC implementation as a guide. > 3. Manageable. The web interface for managing the service is nice. > Being able to reload modules with the server running means more > uptime. Webware can also watch mtimes on the files to reload them when they > are changed. Although Webware allows you to reload individual modules, dependency problems can be a big issue, as dependencies do not get reloaded automatically. You'll also run into problems if you reload modules containing modified class definitions while there are still objects instances created with the previous version of the class. In short, you don't want to go there. Luckily, restarting Webware doesn't mean you'll drop requests. The appserver only shuts down after it was processed all pending requests. Requests which come in while the appserver is restarting will be delayed somewhat (in apache), as mod_webkit attempts to reconnect to the appserver. mod_webkit will retry though (up to 10 times I think), so as long as the appserver comes up within a few seconds, all requests will be served. > So back to my question. Is Webware intended to be a webservices > (web/xmlrpc/soap) app server? Certainly. The only reason Webware lacks soap support is that no one has taken the initiative to work on it. I'm sure if that functionality existed, people would use it. If you're excited about doing that, go for it! On a somewhat related note, I think Ian Bicking has done some work to allow the appserver to more easily support multiple protocols, listening on several ports (i.e. not just http). I don't know what the status of this work is, though. peace, Jason > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials > Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of > GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system > administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click > _______________________________________________ > Webware-discuss mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss -- Jason D. Hildebrand ja...@pe... |
From: Ian B. <ia...@co...> - 2004-03-27 19:02:57
|
On Mar 26, 2004, at 12:25 AM, Jason Hildebrand wrote: > Although Webware allows you to reload individual modules, dependency > problems can be a big issue, as dependencies do not get reloaded > automatically. You'll also run into problems if you reload modules > containing modified class definitions while there are still objects > instances created with the previous version of the class. In short, > you > don't want to go there. > > Luckily, restarting Webware doesn't mean you'll drop requests. The > appserver only shuts down after it was processed all pending requests. > Requests which come in while the appserver is restarting will be > delayed > somewhat (in apache), as mod_webkit attempts to reconnect to the > appserver. > mod_webkit will retry though (up to 10 times I think), so as long as > the > appserver comes up within a few seconds, all requests will be served. I actually gave a lightning talk at PyCon describing how Webware deals with this, and why all other ways of dealing with it suck (since there's corner cases that will drive you crazy). I still have to put the slides up online, but then there's nothing that will be new in it to the Webware crowd. >> So back to my question. Is Webware intended to be a webservices >> (web/xmlrpc/soap) app server? > > Certainly. The only reason Webware lacks soap support is that no one > has > taken the initiative to work on it. I'm sure if that functionality > existed, > people would use it. If you're excited about doing that, go for it! And I bet it would be really easy, as the XMLRPC support for Webware is very simple. > On a somewhat related note, I think Ian Bicking has done some work to > allow the appserver to more easily support multiple protocols, > listening > on several ports (i.e. not just http). I don't know what the status > of this > work is, though. In Webware CVS it has code for this. Actually, it's the code for supporting HTTP, so that you don't need Apache (previously only the mod_webkit protocol was supported). (There's actually a third protocol -- the MONITOR stuff -- but I never even tested it, and I'm pretty sure it had been broken for a while preceding those changes) I'm pretty sure it also allows for the possibility of request objects besides HTTPRequest. But that won't actually be necessary for any of this -- XMLRPCServlet just accepts an HTTPRequest (which was how XMLRPC was designed), and SOAP is pretty much the same. (Unless you want SOAP-over-SMTP or other such tricks -- which isn't impossible, but certainly isn't the place to start) -- Ian Bicking | ia...@co... | http://blog.ianbicking.org |
From: Jason H. <ja...@pe...> - 2004-03-26 16:21:11
|
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 22:53, Randall Smith wrote: > Is there a better app server that 'all the other' Pythoneers are using and > I'm just missing? If not, ring the bell! > Webware is such a simple and powerful framework for building web apps. I agree wholeheartedly and I wanted to follow up on the idea of improving visibility of the Webware project. For people who aren't subscribed to the list (and there are probably many), the website is the primary source of information. It'd be great to make the Webware website more attractive and useful. I'd like to see more links to related projects (kits, packages, templating solutions which Webware users find useful), and tips on using Webware. There was an effort last year to revamp the Webware website. We had contributions for a logo, and I think we voted/decided on one. Does anyone have a copy of the logo we chose? Tom von Schwerdtner (tv...@et...) began working on a new website for the project. I saw a preview of it at one point, but I haven't seen a post from him in over 6 months. I contacted him off-list 3 weeks ago, asking if he still had the site and whether someone could continue work on it. No response though, so I guess we should just start a new one. Is anyone interested in volunteering some time to design a new website for the project? I'd be happy to help coordinate this effort. peace, Jason |
From: Frank B. <fb...@fo...> - 2004-03-26 17:41:34
|
Hallo, Jason Hildebrand hat gesagt: // Jason Hildebrand wrote: > I agree wholeheartedly and I wanted to follow up on the idea of improving > visibility of the Webware project. For people who aren't subscribed > to the list (and there are probably many), the website is the primary > source of information. > > It'd be great to make the Webware website more attractive and useful. > I'd like to see more links to related projects (kits, packages, templating > solutions which Webware users find useful), and tips on using Webware. > > Is anyone interested in volunteering some time to design a new website > for the project? I'd be happy to help coordinate this effort. This would be really great. I would like to extent this effort to include the "dogbowl" effect: The next Webware site IMO should be run by Webware. I know this is next to impossible to do on the Sourceforge servers, so maybe some external hosting of the pages would be needed. But anyway, having a Webware site that also serves as an example site of what could be done with Webware would make WW much more visible per se. And it also could lead to a very cool example application like Plone is for Zope. Well, not that big, but you get the idea, I hope. And maybe this even could breath some new live into some kind of UserKit? ;) ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__ |
From: Aaron H. <aa...@me...> - 2004-03-26 18:06:12
|
Frank Barknecht wrote: >Hallo, >Jason Hildebrand hat gesagt: // Jason Hildebrand wrote: > > > >>I agree wholeheartedly and I wanted to follow up on the idea of improving >>visibility of the Webware project. For people who aren't subscribed >>to the list (and there are probably many), the website is the primary >>source of information. >> >>It'd be great to make the Webware website more attractive and useful. >>I'd like to see more links to related projects (kits, packages, templating >>solutions which Webware users find useful), and tips on using Webware. >> >>Is anyone interested in volunteering some time to design a new website >>for the project? I'd be happy to help coordinate this effort. >> >> > >This would be really great. I would like to extent this effort to >include the "dogbowl" effect: The next Webware site IMO should be run >by Webware. I know this is next to impossible to do on the Sourceforge >servers, so maybe some external hosting of the pages would be needed. > >But anyway, having a Webware site that also serves as an example site >of what could be done with Webware would make WW much more visible per >se. And it also could lead to a very cool example application like >Plone is for Zope. Well, not that big, but you get the idea, I hope. > >And maybe this even could breath some new live into some kind of >UserKit? ;) > >ciao > > I started this many times, but never had the time to get into it. I do have some ideas and even a room on a hosted server we can work with. -Aaron |
From: Eric R. <th...@er...> - 2004-03-26 18:19:56
|
> This would be really great. I would like to extent this effort to > include the "dogbowl" effect: The next Webware site IMO should be run > by Webware. I know this is next to impossible to do on the Sourceforge > servers, so maybe some external hosting of the pages would be needed. I can donate 2U or rack space at our POP (Scranton Pennsylvania, USA) for a server to host WebWare's site. I would suggest a dedicated server so that it could be optimized for WebWare use. Eric Radman www.teisprint.net |
From: Jason H. <ja...@pe...> - 2004-03-26 18:49:42
|
On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 11:41, Frank Barknecht wrote: > This would be really great. I would like to extent this effort to > include the "dogbowl" effect: The next Webware site IMO should be run > by Webware. I know this is next to impossible to do on the > Sourceforge > servers, so maybe some external hosting of the pages would be needed. Yes, that would be great. Eric Radman has offered to provide space for a server, but I don't know if we'll be able to come up with a server. Can anyone provide space on an existing server which is Webware-friendly? > But anyway, having a Webware site that also serves as an example site > of what could be done with Webware would make WW much more visible > per > se. And it also could lead to a very cool example application like > Plone is for Zope. Well, not that big, but you get the idea, I hope. > And maybe this even could breath some new live into some kind of > UserKit? ;) Let's not bite off more than we can chew. ;) I agree that it would be a great sample app, but I'd propose not to build a general "portal solution" (at least not right away ;) -- but to build a site customized to the needs of the Webware project. It should be simple to start with, so that we actually get it up and running sometime soon. We can add bells and whistles later. peace, Jason |
From: Frank B. <fb...@fo...> - 2004-03-26 19:49:06
|
Hallo, Jason Hildebrand hat gesagt: // Jason Hildebrand wrote: > I agree that it would be a great sample app, but I'd propose not to build > a general "portal solution" (at least not right away ;) -- but to build a > site customized to the needs of the Webware project. It should be simple > to start with, so that we actually get it up and running sometime soon. > We can add bells and whistles later. I totally agree. This is something, that can grow over time. But a simple, DB-driven content manager should be fast to build. I mean, this is something, Webware is used for daily by us, so it's probably on everyone's harddisk anyway. (I only prefer SQLObject, not MiddleKit.) Regarding graphics: Generally I think, that most coders don't make good graphics people, that's why normally those are two different departments. Maybe someone here has some graphics wizard at hand who could put together a cool layout? (I don't care much about logos, a good layout is more important for a future WW website.) ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__ |
From: jose <jo...@cy...> - 2004-03-26 18:12:36
|
Well as far as the logos go, we did have a some contributions, but I don't remember there actually being any decision as to which would be official. I still have all the submitted logos on my website and you can certainly use any image you wish. The site with the logos is: http://balac.compmed.ucdavis.edu/logos/ Jose -----Original Message----- From: web...@li... [mailto:web...@li...] On Behalf Of Jason Hildebrand Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 8:18 AM To: Randall Smith Cc: webware-discuss Subject: [Webware-discuss] improving Webware visibility On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 22:53, Randall Smith wrote: > Is there a better app server that 'all the other' Pythoneers are using > and > I'm just missing? If not, ring the bell! > Webware is such a simple and powerful framework for building web apps. I agree wholeheartedly and I wanted to follow up on the idea of improving visibility of the Webware project. For people who aren't subscribed to the list (and there are probably many), the website is the primary source of information. It'd be great to make the Webware website more attractive and useful. I'd like to see more links to related projects (kits, packages, templating solutions which Webware users find useful), and tips on using Webware. There was an effort last year to revamp the Webware website. We had contributions for a logo, and I think we voted/decided on one. Does anyone have a copy of the logo we chose? Tom von Schwerdtner (tv...@et...) began working on a new website for the project. I saw a preview of it at one point, but I haven't seen a post from him in over 6 months. I contacted him off-list 3 weeks ago, asking if he still had the site and whether someone could continue work on it. No response though, so I guess we should just start a new one. Is anyone interested in volunteering some time to design a new website for the project? I'd be happy to help coordinate this effort. peace, Jason ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click _______________________________________________ Webware-discuss mailing list Web...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss |
From: Jason H. <ja...@pe...> - 2004-03-26 18:38:15
|
On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 12:12, jose wrote: > Well as far as the logos go, we did have a some contributions, but I > don't remember there actually being any decision as to which would be > official. You're right, I don't think we actually did decide on one. Maybe we should try to do that... >From the logos posted so far, people seem to be most excited about (some variation) of David Eriksson's. It might be useful to cut some of these out and post them on the site, so that we can comment on them separately. We could also try changing the colour to see if we prefer something other than blue. Anyways, I'd encourage people to submit new and/or derived logos to Jose to post on the site, and maybe we can come to some sort of consensus. peace, Jason |
From: Ben P. <be...@we...> - 2004-03-26 19:55:13
|
> -----Original Message----- > From: web...@li... > [mailto:web...@li...]On Behalf Of Jason > Hildebrand > Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 10:36 AM > > On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 12:12, jose wrote: > > Well as far as the logos go, we did have a some contributions, but I > > don't remember there actually being any decision as to which would be > > official. > > You're right, I don't think we actually did decide on one. Maybe > we should > try to do that... > > >From the logos posted so far, people seem to be most excited about (some > variation) of David Eriksson's. It might be useful to cut some > of these out > and post them on the site, so that we can comment on them separately. We > could also try changing the colour to see if we prefer something > other than > blue. > > Anyways, I'd encourage people to submit new and/or derived logos to Jose > to post on the site, and maybe we can come to some sort of consensus. > > peace, > Jason > Coming up with a quality logo can be a journey, but a worthwhile one. One fun exercise to really get the process started is to ask everyone on the list, or via a survey of some kind, to give one phrase, or idea, or a feeling, or color, or actor, or movie, etc that Webware reminds them of. e.g.: If Webware were a feeling, what would it be? If Webware were one idea, what would it be? How would you summarize Webware in less than 5 words? This survey could even be a page on the Wiki that gets extended with answers. So you end up with a whole bunch of little phrases and metaphors for Webware, which become the inspiration for developing a logo that conveys those ideas. This gives a logo designer a pool of ideas to pull from, and also provides a kind of ideological baseline which in turn provides consistency across different logo designers' efforts (if they read it!). At some point the group can say, Ok we've got this list of ways to describe Webware, now everybody start submitting logos. And once enough submissions come in, the group can vote or the core team managing the development can just pick from those options. Regards, Ben |
From: Todd G. <to...@sl...> - 2004-03-26 22:12:25
|
* Ben Parker <be...@we...> [2004-03-26 15:02]:> > So you end up with a whole bunch of little phrases and metaphors for > Webware, which become the inspiration for developing a logo that conveys > those ideas. This gives a logo designer a pool of ideas to pull from, > and also provides a kind of ideological baseline which in turn provides > consistency across different logo designers' efforts (if they read it!). glad to see this campaign picking up again... In addition to Ben's good points above, I'd like to confirm/clarify a few details: - is the full name 'Webware' or 'Webware for Python'? - if the latter, is it really necessary to have 'for Python'? - i think a more functional 'sub title' such as 'application server', or 'web components', or 'framework', or something along those lines would be better in both a marketing and informative sense. 'appserver' of course is the most marketingese, and I'd guess makes some people shudder. But I don't think that should discount it. - are any color palettes/schemes ruled in or out? or are we still wide open? - does any of this effort require approval from any particular people? from Chuck for example? or is this group consensus? this is an area that often seems to trip up these types of efforts, so it'd be good to know ahead of time... Looking forward to trying to help out here, just wanting to get some ground rules before starting... -- ___________________________ toddgrimason*to...@sl... |
From: Jason H. <ja...@pe...> - 2004-03-26 22:45:53
|
On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 16:12, Todd Grimason wrote: > - is the full name 'Webware' or 'Webware for Python'? AFAIK the official name is "Webware for Python", to disambiguate from other uses of the term "Webware" or "WebWare" on the internet. > - if the latter, is it really necessary to have 'for Python'? > - i think a more functional 'sub title' such as 'application server', > or 'web components', or 'framework', or something along those > lines would be better in both a marketing and informative > sense. 'appserver' of course is the most marketingese, and I'd guess > makes some people shudder. But I don't think that should discount it. I think for a lot of people, the fact that it's Python is important -- so I wouldn't necessarily want to throw that away. But I agree that a more functional subtitle could be beneficial. > - are any color palettes/schemes ruled in or out? or are we still > wide > open? I'd say it's wide open until someone starts working on a site. And even after that it's not too late to change, you just have to deal with inertia. :) > - does any of this effort require approval from any particular > people? > from Chuck for example? or is this group consensus? this is an area > that often seems to trip up these types of efforts, so it'd be good > to know ahead of time... Good question. I don't know if Chuck considers himself to be the Webware BDFL -- I'll let him speak to that. :) My take on the situation is that most developers are very busy and don't have huge amounts of time to invest in the project right now, but would be very happy to see a new website. -- Jason D. Hildebrand ja...@pe... |
From: Eric R. <th...@er...> - 2004-03-27 03:19:35
|
> I think for a lot of people, the fact that it's Python is important -- so I > wouldn't necessarily want to throw that away. But I agree that a more > functional subtitle could be beneficial. I agree. The fact that this is a Python framework is very important. This framework would not have the same appeal if it was VB! Eric |
From: Chuck E. <Chu...@ya...> - 2004-03-27 23:08:34
|
On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 17:12:26 -0500, Todd Grimason wrote: > In addition to Ben's good points above, I'd like to confirm/clarify > a few details: > > - is the full name 'Webware' or 'Webware for Python'? When I started Webware, there were already other Webwares (but none of them= were app servers). There was a column, webware.com, a non-hosted= webware.org, the generic term, etc. I made the official, public name "Webware for Python" to avoid stepping on= toes. Plus Python rocks and Webware certainly feels pretty Pythonic since= it is straightforward and practical. > - does any of this effort require approval from any particular > people? from Chuck for example? or is this group consensus? this is > an area that often seems to trip up these types of efforts, so it'd > be good to know ahead of time... I'm comfortable that if we want to revamp the web page or have a logo, that= we decide as a group either as vote by the developers or by the entire= community. On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 16:43:41 -0600, Jason Hildebrand wrote: > AFAIK the official name is "Webware for Python", to disambiguate > from other uses of the term "Webware" or "WebWare" on the internet. Bingo. > Good question. I don't know if Chuck considers himself to be the > Webware BDFL -- I'll let him speak to that. :) Over time we've naturally evolved into an oligarchy of developers where I'm= no longer "laying it down" code- and policy-wise like I did in the first= year. And so far, so good! I'm comfortable with people taking initiatives like these and following= through. If you're getting consensus from Webware developers like Jason,= Ian and Geoff, consider it blessed. I think the oligarchy can work for most, maybe all, things. I won't be= flexing my BDFL title unless some conflict arises or you start embedding= Perl in the source base. :-) > My take on the situation is that most developers are very busy and > don't have huge amounts of time to invest in the project right now, > but would be very happy to see a new website. Bingo. Regarding money, we can almost certainly get hosting for free from somebody= and it looks like a somebody has already appeared. But we could also use= money to run ads on SF.net and other places to see if we can ramp up our= user base which inevitably leads to good things. Just a thought. -Chuck -- http://ChuckEsterbrook.com/ |
From: Todd G. <to...@sl...> - 2004-03-28 01:59:12
|
* Chuck Esterbrook <Chu...@ya...> [2004-03-27 18:12]: > On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 17:12:26 -0500, Todd Grimason wrote: > > In addition to Ben's good points above, I'd like to confirm/clarify > > a few details: > > > > - is the full name 'Webware' or 'Webware for Python'? > > When I started Webware, there were already other Webwares (but none of them were app servers). There was a column, webware.com, a non-hosted webware.org, the generic term, etc. > > I made the official, public name "Webware for Python" to avoid stepping on toes. Plus Python rocks and Webware certainly feels pretty Pythonic since it is straightforward and practical. Ah - I didn't realize there were(is?) other projects out there with the same name. I certainly didn't mean to attack Python (obviously), just thought it kinda sounds like 'Struts for Java' or 'Zope for Python', etc. Going to 'Webware', with maybe a tagline kinda like 'Python Appserver' or whatever might be something to consider. But based on my other forays into this topic on other projects many people seem to have strong personal attachments to things like names, so I won't be pushing any further... (though I'd say there's a bit of precedent set from other projects such as Zope, and Java, Ruby, etc.. equivalents. but I suppose some might see that as more reason not to go that way.) -- ___________________________ toddgrimason*to...@sl... |
From: Jason H. <ja...@pe...> - 2004-03-29 15:29:45
|
On Sat, 2004-03-27 at 19:59, Todd Grimason wrote: > Ah - I didn't realize there were(is?) other projects out there with > the same name. I certainly didn't mean to attack Python (obviously), > just thought it kinda sounds like 'Struts for Java' or 'Zope for > Python', etc. > Going to 'Webware', with maybe a tagline kinda like 'Python > Appserver' > or whatever might be something to consider. But based on my other > forays into this topic on other projects many people seem to have > strong personal attachments to things like names, so I won't be > pushing any further... I think it might be worth pursuing this a bit further -- it certainly can't hurt to brainstorm a little bit. I like the idea of a tagline which gives a better clue as to what the project is about; perhaps using a word like "toolkit" or "framework" in the tagline ("Appserver" doesn't do it for me, <shrug>). I guess the image of "tools" appeals to me because that's what I feel Webware gives me: lots of tools which I can use how I want. It also conveys the idea that Webware is made up of several components (kits), not all of which must be used. You pick the tools you want to use. Using this idea, I find "Webware" with tagline "Python Web Application Toolkit" quite appealing. -- Jason D. Hildebrand ja...@pe... |
From: Eric R. <th...@er...> - 2004-03-29 17:13:59
|
On 20:59 Sat 27 Mar , Todd Grimason wrote: > Ah - I didn't realize there were(is?) other projects out there with > the same name. I certainly didn't mean to attack Python (obviously), > just thought it kinda sounds like 'Struts for Java' or 'Zope for > Python', etc. > > Going to 'Webware', with maybe a tagline kinda like 'Python Appserver' > or whatever might be something to consider. But based on my other > forays into this topic on other projects many people seem to have > strong personal attachments to things like names, so I won't be > pushing any further... > > (though I'd say there's a bit of precedent set from other projects > such as Zope, and Java, Ruby, etc.. equivalents. but I suppose some > might see that as more reason not to go that way.) "Cold Fusion" is an example of a great name--it's a word picture that's unique. The word "Zope" also carries a very clear identity that "WebWare for Python" does not. I recommend a new name! Armature Python Kinetics for the Web Has anyone else thought of what they would name it? This topic is important because it changes the way that this framework is presented. In the idea above, a visual theme could now incorporate graphics terminology that borrows from the analogy of an electric motor. Eric |
From: Shayne O. <sh...@pe...> - 2004-03-29 18:40:24
|
MAy I humbly suggest sticking with webware. The names out there. The branding sticks. Some projects disapear after the established brand name changes. Ever remember what happened to Killustrator? Also if one MUST change it, theres something microsoft worked out:: The name should indicate what it is. word = word processor windows = windowing environment office = office suite. So if you MUST, then it should indicate that its at core a servlet and psp engine with 'middleware bits'. Seriously tho. Keep the name. I found it via my nifty little Dietel Python book and if the name had changed , I'd of assumed it was a dead project and whatever it became was 'yet another python cgi jibbajabba' -- Shayne O'Neill http://perth.indymedia.org I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family." ----George W. Bush On Mon, 29 Mar 2004, Eric Radman wrote: > On 20:59 Sat 27 Mar , Todd Grimason wrote: > > Ah - I didn't realize there were(is?) other projects out there with > > the same name. I certainly didn't mean to attack Python (obviously), > > just thought it kinda sounds like 'Struts for Java' or 'Zope for > > Python', etc. > > > > Going to 'Webware', with maybe a tagline kinda like 'Python Appserver' > > or whatever might be something to consider. But based on my other > > forays into this topic on other projects many people seem to have > > strong personal attachments to things like names, so I won't be > > pushing any further... > > > > (though I'd say there's a bit of precedent set from other projects > > such as Zope, and Java, Ruby, etc.. equivalents. but I suppose some > > might see that as more reason not to go that way.) > > "Cold Fusion" is an example of a great name--it's a word picture that's unique. > The word "Zope" also carries a very clear identity that "WebWare for Python" > does not. > > I recommend a new name! > > Armature > Python Kinetics for the Web > > Has anyone else thought of what they would name it? This topic is important > because it changes the way that this framework is presented. In the idea above, > a visual theme could now incorporate graphics terminology that borrows from the > analogy of an electric motor. > > Eric > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials > Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of > GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system > administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click > _______________________________________________ > Webware-discuss mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss > |
From: Jacob H. <ja...@ja...> - 2004-03-29 18:57:37
|
Hello everyone, I know it's really hard to get everyone to agree on a logo and a name, but one thing is for sure--Webware needs a nice logo. In the interest of progress, I made a logo this morning: http://www.alphamotion.com/logo1_02.gif I've always liked pygame's logo and cherrypy's. I guess I dig the cartoon-look. Anyway, how does it grab you? Jacob ... _/ _/ _/ Jacob Hanson _/ _/_/_/ mailto:ja...@ja... _/_/_/ _/ _/ http://www.jacobhanson.com Monday, March 29, 2004, 11:25:52 AM, you wrote: > MAy I humbly suggest sticking with webware. > The names out there. The branding sticks. Some projects disapear after the > established brand name changes. Ever remember what happened to > Killustrator? |
From: Pawel J M. <dzi...@ci...> - 2004-03-29 19:11:10
|
On Mon, Mar 29, 2004 at 11:59:04AM -0700, Jacob Hanson wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I know it's really hard to get everyone to agree on a logo and a name, > but one thing is for sure--Webware needs a nice logo. In the interest > of progress, I made a logo this morning: > > http://www.alphamotion.com/logo1_02.gif > nice :))) regards, kender |
From: Aaron S. <aa...@ne...> - 2004-03-29 21:20:08
|
I really like this logo... I like it better than the other ones that were mentioned earlier. How would an icon size version of it look like? The big one is nice for the head of a web page, but when I think of a logo, I usually think of something extremely simple and recognizible, like the Nike swoosh or Red Hat's, well, red hat. Maybe it could be something like a simpler version of the python with the wrench in it's mouth and a blue W behind it... just a thought. Secondly, for those wondering about my hosting offer. Yes, the server is through EV1 (formerly rackshack.net) and yes it's the same EV1 that gave money to SCO. I have been considering moving to a new company for a while, but it would be a huge hassle getting the various websites a run setup again. But if anyone in the Webware community has a good suggestion for a company to move to I may just take the plunge. Since I've had the machine for a couple of years, even just leasing a new server from EV1 and canceling my current one would get me a better system for cheaper. - Aaron Switzer On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 13:59, Jacob Hanson wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I know it's really hard to get everyone to agree on a logo and a name, > but one thing is for sure--Webware needs a nice logo. In the interest > of progress, I made a logo this morning: > > http://www.alphamotion.com/logo1_02.gif > > I've always liked pygame's logo and cherrypy's. I guess I dig the > cartoon-look. Anyway, how does it grab you? > > Jacob > ... > _/ _/ _/ Jacob Hanson > _/ _/_/_/ mailto:ja...@ja... > _/_/_/ _/ _/ http://www.jacobhanson.com > > > Monday, March 29, 2004, 11:25:52 AM, you wrote: > > MAy I humbly suggest sticking with webware. > > > The names out there. The branding sticks. Some projects disapear after the > > established brand name changes. Ever remember what happened to > > Killustrator? > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials > Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of > GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system > administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click > _______________________________________________ > Webware-discuss mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss -- Aaron Switzer aa...@ne... 416-350-8376 ext. 235 |
From: Ian B. <ia...@co...> - 2004-03-29 21:31:48
|
Jacob Hanson wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I know it's really hard to get everyone to agree on a logo and a name, > but one thing is for sure--Webware needs a nice logo. In the interest > of progress, I made a logo this morning: > > http://www.alphamotion.com/logo1_02.gif > > I've always liked pygame's logo and cherrypy's. I guess I dig the > cartoon-look. Anyway, how does it grab you? I quite like it. It's not too corporate or boring, but still kind of professional feeling. In an irreverent sort of way. Ian |