Guest post by InfoWorld’s Rick Grehan provides an in-depth comparison of six Python Web frameworks, including CubicWeb, Django, Pyramid, Web.py, Web2py, and Zope 2. ‘No matter what your needs or leanings as a Python developer might be, one of these frameworks promises to be a good fit,’ Grehan writes. ‘As usual, the choice is highly subjective. You will find zealots for each product, and every zealot is able to present rational reasons why their chosen framework is superior.’
I am interested in doing some web programming, so I took a look at all the web frameworks Python has to offer (there’s more than what is mentioned here), and my head nearly exploded. Then I looked at PHP and was dismayed to find that they have about as many as Python does, if not more.
I think what we REALLY need are a few more web frameworks to choose from… there doesn’t seem to be enough already.
That’s not specific to web frameworks, if you look at administration suites there is the same issue..
If a topic is easy, then there will be a buttload of solutions, making the selection difficult; if a topic is hard, sometimes there is no solution (good videocards drivers)..
I just skimmed the article, but I found no mention of pylons? Really? When I was evaluating frameworks for a web project a while back, pylons seemed like the fit among all the python offerings.
Pyramid is the new pylons.
Pylons is legacy now. repoze.bfg + pylons = Pyramid.
Ahh, I deserve an RTFA for my original comment. I haven’t looked at pylons since the name change, but TFA does explicitly mention:
“Pyramid, a flexible new offering from the group that produced the popular Pylons framework…”
Nevermind… Nobody likes a Johnny Come Lately.
Edited 2011-08-11 03:13 UTC
still prefer rails.
I started out with Pylons and ended up with CherryPy, which I found to be superior to pylons in every way.
Of course they did not mention cherrypy in the article.