Pros/Cons of Turbogears/Rails?

[Cliff Wells]

On Thu, 2006-08-31 at 09:04 -0700, Paul Boddie wrote:

> SkunkWeb (3.4.0), Zope (2.9.4 and 3.2.1), Plone (2.5), Karrigell (2.3),
> CherryPy (2.2.1), Spyce (2.1), QP (1.8), Cymbeline (1.3.1), Django
> (0.95), Webware (0.9.1), Pylons (0.9.1), TurboGears (0.8.9), PyLucid
> (v0.7.0RC4), Paste (0.4.1), web.py (.138)

And ironically, the one with the *lowest* version number (web.py) is
used to power some fairly large (and ambitious) public projects:

https://www.youos.com/ ( see http://blog.youos.com/?p=49 )
http://reddit.com/

I'd like to claim that in OSS, version numbers mean little, but I still
recall Windows NT 1.0 (er, I mean 3.1), so I guess they don't mean much
anywhere.  Version numbers are *picked* by project leads for varying
reasons, so comparing version numbers from different projects is pretty
pointless.  Is Windows 2000 more stable than Linux 2.6?  It ought to be
since it's 769 times more mature, right?  Even if you called it Windows
NT 5.0, I'd have to wonder if it's even twice as stable (I'm being
intentionally generous here, so bear with me).

Personally I tend to look at what the users (especially former users)
say about a project and what's been or being done with that project.  If
it seems promising, I try it.  I can't think of any other reasonable way
of making that decision.

Regards,
Cliff

--