From: chas <ch...@cy...> - 2004-10-27 08:29:39
|
I am looking for web and application development frameworks - Webware is a possible candidate, partly due to being Python-based and partly that it seems to have a sensible approach and a structure.=20 I have used Zope and am in the process of replacing it, mainly due to its un-necessarily complicated and quirky architecture, poor organization and dire documentation - which is some of the worst I have ever had the displeasure to encounter. A main concern about a framework - or any software for that matter - is the reliability of the software. This can be indicated by the progress of bug resolution, overcoming weaknesses and other signs of product development. Although I am encourage by Webware's recent developments (WSGI application, web site re-organization), I am discouraged by the slow or apparently non-existent progress of bug fixes plus the time taken between releases (e.g. over one year since the last beta release). Please note that I appreciate it is often difficult for authors to continue to develop or support open-source - we all gotta make a living :-) , so I do not want to criticize in anyway: the effort which the Webware authors have exhibited should be applauded. Nonetheless, if I (or anyone) is going to commit themselves to a platform, framework, or whatever, then they need to know that if something doesn't work, it will get fixed sooner rather than later. So, after all that, what do I want to know? I would like to know what the development and general status of Webware is. Has it gone through a quiet time, but now effort being renewed? Or has it, in terms of serious development and bug fixes, stalled? If so, why (e.g. lack of developer support, time, etc.)? Any info or response - other than flames - would be greatly appreciated. cheers, chas Reply to cd...@cy... |
From: Matt F. <ma...@da...> - 2004-10-27 20:53:51
|
Hi Chas. I'm not one of the developers, but I've been using webkit nearly exclusively for almost 3 years. I think that part of the reason that there aren't many bug fixes is that there aren't many bugs. The bugs that are found tend to be pretty simple, and I've seen them get resolved quickly. I think that it's a testament to the simplicity of the framework. I can't speak for the developers, but I know that Webware is in heavy use by many people. We talk often on this list about getting new release, but it never happens, mainly because the features/bugs have reached a point of good stability, and it's just not crucial for anyone. Also, I expect that lots of people here are willing to use the CVS tip for their work; we don't, but some do. I think that the core developers would certainly fall into the latter category. They're here, and they contribute to troubleshooting for newbies and the like, but there just isn't enough momentum to get constant releases. Many people (like me) have contemplated getting a release cut, but it's hard to make that commitment when there is client work to do. I wouldn't say that it has gone through a quiet time or is being renewed; nor would I say that it's stalled. I'd say that it's just chugging along nicely. I'd say that the history of this list is a good barometer, really. Just because there is no "progress" doesn't mean that the code doesn't work. For example, I bet that the core GNU utils don't have many bug fixes, but they're in heavy use ;-) There have been some similar questions to yours lately; you may benefit from reading the responses to them also. Good luck in your research. chas wrote: >... >A main concern about a framework - or any software for that matter - >is the reliability of the software. This can be indicated by the >progress of bug resolution, overcoming weaknesses and other signs of >product development. Although I am encourage by Webware's recent >developments (WSGI application, web site re-organization), I am >discouraged by the slow or apparently non-existent progress of bug >fixes plus the time taken between releases (e.g. over one year since >the last beta release). > ... >So, after all that, what do I want to know? I would like to know what >the development and general status of Webware is. Has it gone through >a quiet time, but now effort being renewed? Or has it, in terms of >serious development and bug fixes, stalled? If so, why (e.g. lack of >developer support, time, etc.)? > |
From: lloyd <sub...@tw...> - 2004-10-28 03:43:46
|
Matt Feifarek wrote: > I can't speak for the developers, but I know that Webware is in heavy > use by many people. We talk often on this list about getting new > release, but it never happens, mainly because the features/bugs have > reached a point of good stability, and it's just not crucial for anyone. > Also, I expect that lots of people here are willing to use the CVS tip > for their work; we don't, but some do. I think that the core developers > would certainly fall into the latter category. They're here, and they > contribute to troubleshooting for newbies and the like, but there just > isn't enough momentum to get constant releases. i'm using webware in a project for the first time. maybe it's irrational, but i feel more comfortable using a release than the latest snapshot. on the other hand, i'd like to explore the use of middlekit, but postgresql support (which i need) is only in cvs. so, FWIW, i think having a new release would be cool :-) |
From: Ian B. <ia...@co...> - 2004-10-28 15:46:33
|
lloyd wrote: > i'm using webware in a project for the first time. maybe it's > irrational, but i feel more comfortable using a release than the latest > snapshot. > > on the other hand, i'd like to explore the use of middlekit, but > postgresql support (which i need) is only in cvs. I think MiddleKit should really be distributed separately. It has very few dependencies on other pieces of Webware, and would lend itself well to a distutiled installation. Anyway, short of that I'm guessing it would be easy to use CVS MiddleKit with 0.8.1 Webware. -- Ian Bicking / ia...@co... / http://blog.ianbicking.org |
From: chas <ch...@cy...> - 2004-10-28 08:24:13
|
Hi Matt, Thanks for taking the time and effort to reply (and quickly!) and for your helpful comments. It is very useful to know that "the reason that there aren't many bug fixes is that there aren't many bugs".=20 Considering that there aren't many bugs and that it is stable, would it be logical, even easy, to upgrade the status from Beta to GA, (e.g. doing a new release with version number 1.xx)? This would a) reflect confidence in the Webware's stability b) encourage take-up and widen the user base c) incorporate improvements into the release which are currently only accessible via cvs (as suggested by lloyd in his follow-up message to your reply). Considering what I have discovered regarding frameworks, there is a great need (for oddies like me, anyway :D ) for a _good_ n-tier web framework alternative to J2EE (powerful, but too heavyweight for my needs). If Webworks has the stability, then perhaps it is the one (no pun intended, Matrix fans) : perhaps a GA release would give Webworks wider recognition...? promotion...? acceptance...? Anyway, your confidence has encouraged me to give it a try (sort of play-and-see). Thanks again for your reply and info. cheers, chas On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:54:57 -0400, you wrote: >Hi Chas. > >I'm not one of the developers, but I've been using webkit nearly=20 >exclusively for almost 3 years. > >I think that part of the reason that there aren't many bug fixes is that= =20 >there aren't many bugs. The bugs that are found tend to be pretty=20 >simple, and I've seen them get resolved quickly. I think that it's a=20 >testament to the simplicity of the framework. -- snip -- >I wouldn't say that it has gone through a quiet time or is being=20 >renewed; nor would I say that it's stalled. I'd say that it's just=20 >chugging along nicely. I'd say that the history of this list is a good=20 >barometer, really. Just because therethere aren't many bugs is no = "progress" doesn't mean that=20 >the code doesn't work. For example, I bet that the core GNU utils don't=20 >have many bug fixes, but they're in heavy use ;-) > >There have been some similar questions to yours lately; you may benefit=20 >from reading the responses to them also. |
From: <jk...@de...> - 2004-10-28 14:47:30
|
I'll add my 2cents because my useage perspective is slightly different from most. I recently (2+ months ago) accepted my current position as software architect and I kinda recieved ownership of a web architecture that utilizes Webware. So I didn't get to really choose to use it.=20 However, I've reimplemented our web architecture over it so that its easier on our page authors, Human Experience designer and developers responsible for supporting those people and I've been pretty pleasantly surprised and happy with what Webware does for us. There are tiny things that I'd like to tweak and alter but nothing major.= =20 I've been satisfied with performance, useage and documentation of webware overall. We use webware and webkit with Cheetah templates (not really my first choice, but effective and useful overall as well), so that might give you an idea of the model we employ here. We're working with the last officia= l release, so I've found at least one bug and after this list was able to assist me in identifying the issue at hand found that the bug had already been identified and fixed in the 'tips' of the cvs module for webkit. This is my first architectural position involving python so I was unverse= d in the options that were out there, and my boss coming in made it clear h= e didn't want to get rid of webware (we have legacy code that works as is and no time to completely replace it to support a new engine), so I don't know what you're up against in terms of alternatives, but the bottom line is that Webware seems to be a living product with a reasonable size and helpful user base. This list is one that I watch actively everyday. hope this is useful data for you, jd > Hi Matt, > > Thanks for taking the time and effort to reply (and quickly!) and for > your helpful comments. It is very useful to know that "the reason that > there aren't many bug fixes is that there aren't many bugs". > > Considering that there aren't many bugs and that it is stable, would > it be logical, even easy, to upgrade the status from Beta to GA, (e.g. > doing a new release with version number 1.xx)? This would > a) reflect confidence in the Webware's stability > b) encourage take-up and widen the user base > c) incorporate improvements into the release which are currently only > accessible via cvs (as suggested by lloyd in his follow-up message to > your reply). > > Considering what I have discovered regarding frameworks, there is a > great need (for oddies like me, anyway :D ) for a _good_ n-tier web > framework alternative to J2EE (powerful, but too heavyweight for my > needs). If Webworks has the stability, then perhaps it is the one (no > pun intended, Matrix fans) : perhaps a GA release would give Webworks > wider recognition...? promotion...? acceptance...? > > Anyway, your confidence has encouraged me to give it a try (sort of > play-and-see). > > Thanks again for your reply and info. > > cheers, > chas > > On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:54:57 -0400, you wrote: > >>Hi Chas. >> >>I'm not one of the developers, but I've been using webkit nearly >>exclusively for almost 3 years. >> >>I think that part of the reason that there aren't many bug fixes is tha= t >>there aren't many bugs. The bugs that are found tend to be pretty >>simple, and I've seen them get resolved quickly. I think that it's a >>testament to the simplicity of the framework. > > -- snip -- > >>I wouldn't say that it has gone through a quiet time or is being >>renewed; nor would I say that it's stalled. I'd say that it's just >>chugging along nicely. I'd say that the history of this list is a good >>barometer, really. Just because therethere aren't many bugs is no >> "progress" doesn't mean that >>the code doesn't work. For example, I bet that the core GNU utils don't >>have many bug fixes, but they're in heavy use ;-) >> >>There have been some similar questions to yours lately; you may benefit >>from reading the responses to them also. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE > LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idU88&alloc_id=12065&op=CCk > _______________________________________________ > Webware-discuss mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss > |
From: Matt F. <ma...@da...> - 2004-10-28 15:48:51
|
Hi Chas. Perhaps the developers can chime in on the version numbering, but I'd say that it may be this: although the framework is quite stable, I know that there are some things that we all want it to be that it is not yet, so I expect this explains the wait for v 1.0. I'm glad that you're giving it a try. I think that you'll find it a pleasure to work with. chas wrote: >Hi Matt, > >Thanks for taking the time and effort to reply (and quickly!) and for >your helpful comments. It is very useful to know that "the reason that >there aren't many bug fixes is that there aren't many bugs". > > > |
From: rd <rd...@ta...> - 2004-10-29 03:48:17
|
All -- My opinion only, and it may also fly like a stone chicken, but here goes. In the *nix world, unlike Windoz, version 1.0 and up does not have the "it finally legitimate" meaning so many have come to expect. I have been using Webware for some time now, all be it for a low tech, low usage website ... but also without any problems. I am still on version 0.7 and have had NO problems. Please do not let "a version less than 1.0" be any kind of deciding factor. My $0.02. -rdg On Thu, 2004-10-28 at 10:49, Matt Feifarek wrote: > Hi Chas. > > Perhaps the developers can chime in on the version numbering, but I'd > say that it may be this: although the framework is quite stable, I know > that there are some things that we all want it to be that it is not yet, > so I expect this explains the wait for v 1.0. > > I'm glad that you're giving it a try. I think that you'll find it a > pleasure to work with. > > chas wrote: > > >Hi Matt, > > > >Thanks for taking the time and effort to reply (and quickly!) and for > >your helpful comments. It is very useful to know that "the reason that > >there aren't many bug fixes is that there aren't many bugs". > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This Newsletter Sponsored by: Macrovision > For reliable Linux application installations, use the industry's leading > setup authoring tool, InstallShield X. Learn more and evaluate > today. http://clk.atdmt.com/MSI/go/ins0030000001msi/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Webware-discuss mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss -- ((U+C+I) x (10-S))/20 x A x 1/(1-sin(F/10)) |