|
|
Posted by ELINTPimp on 08/07/07 19:54
On Aug 7, 1:41 pm, walterbyrd <walterb...@iname.com> wrote:
> I am considering PHP and Python frameworks. This is what I'd like:
>
> 1) Good documentation
> 2) Active community
> 3) Easy to set up a CRUD grid
> 4) Built in ability to handle complex data relations
> 5) Strong data validation
> 6) Built in multi-level user authentication
> 7) Ajax enabled inline editing
> 8) Easy to deploy and configure
> 9) Low system requirements
> 10) Misc.
>
> I have looked at the following frameworks, this is my analysis:
>
> Codeignitor:
> Great documentation, good community, very low system requirements,
> easy to deploy. But fails on CRUD and Ajax.
>
> CakePHP:
> Biggest and most active community of all, low system requirements,
> easy to deploy. Several popular PHP projects integrate with Cake in
> one way or another: Drupal, Joomla, Mambo, PhpBB. The complaint I read
> about, constantly, is the documentation.
>
> Qcodo:
> Decent community, system requirements are not too bad (PHP5), easy
> enough to deploy. The CRUD and Ajax features are the best I've ever
> seen. When it comes to developing a sortable, searchable, inline
> editable grid; Qcodo seems to blow away all the others. I am somewhat
> concerned about doing anything outside of what is shown in the
> tutorials. Also, somewhat concerned about maintainability. For
> example, I think Qcodo generates 8 files for every table you create -
> seems like a lot.
>
> Django:
> The system requirement, deployment, and configuration issues seem
> overwhelming. I get the impression that Python framework developers
> just assume the user has complete control over the server. Those who
> develop Python frameworks seem to have no regard for the realities of
> shared hosting. System requirements tend to be sky-high: Apache 2.x,
> mod_python (latest version), fastcgi (at least), command line access,
> PostgreSQL (recommended). Assuming you can meet the system
> requirements, you still have server configuration issues such as
> setting up the Path, and maybe the .htaccess file. Then there is the
> ongoing configuration: database model has to be synced to database,
> configuration file for every application, urls have to be configured
> to match your view, webserver has to be restarted every time modify
> your code - or touch every file if using fastcgi. Django may be a
> great project, but the admin overhead seems excessive. Also, not much
> built-in Ajax support.
>
> TurboGears:
> System requirements about the same as Django. Better Ajax support than
> Django. TurboGears in a bunch of other Python projects glued together.
> I have mixed feeling about the "Frankenstein" approach. On the one
> hand, I understand the desire to have "best of breed," on the other
> hand, I'm not sure I'm comfortable with components being swapped out
> fairly frequently. For example, according to wikipedia, TurboGears
> components consist of: "MochiKit, SQLObject, CherryPy and Kid." As I
> understand it, practically all of those components have been swapped,
> or will soon be swapped.
>
> Rails:
> System requirement issues again. Also, as I understand it, Rails does
> not handle complex data relations very well.
I noticed you didn't mention the symfony project. http://www.symfony-project.com/
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|