On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:32 AM, Christoph Zwerschke <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 08.11.2010 21:18 schrieb Tim Black: >> >> Get Pyramids | Need more? Get TurboGears > > The "more/less" dichotomy may be somewhat misleading, though. The top layers > will certainly add features and functionality, but on the other hand they > will also hide some of the lower-level features and complexity, e.g. by > providing object tree dispatch so you don't need to deal with manual > dispatch rules and contexts. In this sense, people want to choose the > higher-level layer because they actually want less (of the lower-level > complexity), not more. Letting the top layer provide reasonable opinonated > defaults is also because people normally want to have less (decisions to > make), not more.
Still, the idea of the catchy links is good. We could have a "What's the difference?" link next to it. Perhaps TurboGears can be renamed to show a closer relationship to Pyramid, without being "THE (one and only) high-level Pyramid framework". Perhaps a "Pyramid with Batteries" kind of something. Ben had suggested Gears, but I said Google may have trademark objections about that. But maybe "Pyramid Gears" as a full name would work. -- Mike Orr <[email protected]> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en.
