Is Django the way to go for a newbie?

[Dwight GoldWinde]

WowŠsuch a generous response. Thank you, Laura!

Based upon your feedback, I did some additional investigation and decided
to go with Django. One of the reasons is that it¹s got everything in the
package. For example, I won¹t have to go outside of Django for my database
needs. And, although my website will be simple to start, it will grow in
sophistication over the years.

Thank you, again!

BIG SMILE...

Always, Dwight


www.3forliving.key.to (video playlist on YouTube)
www.couragebooks.key.to (all my books on Amazon)






On 8/9/15, 2:23 PM, "Laura Creighton" <lac at openend.se> wrote:

>There are lots of Web Frameworks.
>https://wiki.python.org/moin/WebFrameworks
>
>lists some of them.
>
>I wouldn't place too much faith in the classification of some as
>'Popular' and others as 'Regarded as Less Popular' --  I keep getting
>the itch to put a wikipedia style footnote (by whom) -- in my corner of
>the world Zope 2 and Pylons are very popular, and Pyramid which is the
>successor to Pylons is rather more popular than either.  All 3 of them
>are more popular around here than web2py (which is also popular, just
>not at much) and I don't know anybody who is using Turbogears at all.
>(Pyramid is listed under the 'non full stack frameworks' but if I had
>been making the list it would be under full stack; maybe the list
>got made when Pyramid was more incomplete.)
>
>The most important consideration when choosing a web framework is
>whether you have somebody local who can help you, in person, with
>the thing.  If you have such a person, and they prefer a certain
>Framework, go for that one.
>
>Otherwise there really isn't a thing to do but build a small example
>and see how you like it.  Because they actually play quite differently.
>They are designed by people to make things most convenient for the way
>they like to work, to expose the complexity that they want control over
>and hide the stuff they don't.  This means, for instance that the very
>things that web2py lovers like the best about their framework is
>precisely what the people who dislike web2py hate about it -- and
>the same is true for Django, and all down the list.  Remember that
>the people who love Django (for instance) are all quite happy to
>write blog posts about their happiness, while the people who find
>writing Django code most unpleasant don't tend to talk about it.
>They just find something they like better, and use it.
>
>You will be happiest with the one that fits your brain best, but alas
>it is hard to know what that will be before you try it.  But there is
>one major split you probably know about yourself when figuring out
>what to try first.  If you are the sort of person who takes great
>comfort from the knowledge that 'all the batteries are included' and
>that you will never _outgrow_ your framework, should you need to do
>some new thing with it, the components will already be there, then you
>will prefer a full stack framework.  The disadvantage in using a
>comprehensive framework like that is that you will have much less
>flexibility in how you do things -- you will have to do Django things
>the Django way, and web2py things the web2py way, etc.  And things
>will be much more complicated.  But if you  are naturally inclined
>towards comprehensive solutions, start playing with the Full Stack
>Frameworks.  If you throw up your hands and say 'this is all too
>complicated!' you can then try something simpler.
>
>If, on the other hand, your natural inclination is to dislike
>comprehensive
>solutions because you always want to go after the _simplest_ thing that
>can work, then you should start playing with Micro frameworks.  And
>if you throw up your hands saying 'But this thing barely has support
>for anything!  I don't want to have to write my own <this>, <that>,
>and <some other thing>' then you can try something more comprehensive.
>
>Sorry not to be more helpful, but this is very much one of the cases
>where 'it depends' and it very much 'depends on you'.
>
>Laura
>