|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
Re: [PLUG] Advice for Web Application Framework
|
Thanks for the replies! Except for the suggestion to use a Java Framework they've all been good suggestions. It sounds like a lot of people are happy with Django (and derivatives like pinax), if I liked Python I think I would be persuaded at this point, but I'm a curly braces kind of guy*.
The best choices seem to be, Catalyst, CGI::Application, and Django. A quick search turned up at least 10 books on Django, two on Catalyst and CGI::Application has no books but shouldn't need one.
To reiterate what I'm trying to do.
It is a database application, most of the data will be static. The Web Application is going to provide an interface. Users need to be authenticated to the database, and the database will manage their permissions (what they can see and or change). The interface will present the data in tables, forms and reports. Logic will be implemented as Stored Procedures.
In choosing, is Django demonstrably superior to Catalyst in itself? Is CGI::Application going to provide everything necessary? and if so how much easier than Catalyst or Django will it be to become functional? And is there would be a benefit to learning Catalyst or Django? i.e. would it suddenly make me employable?
* And I'm old fashioned, if $B is 3 and I write $A=$B, I mean that $A is 3, not that $A is a pointer to $B (as would happen in Python with the statement A=B), if I wanted that I would write $A=\$B.
-----Original Message-----
From: plug-bounces@lists.phillylinux.org [mailto:plug-bounces@lists.phillylinux.org] On Behalf Of Jason Stelzer
Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 8:53 AM
To: Philadelphia Linux User's Group Discussion List
Subject: Re: [PLUG] Advice for Web Application Framework
If you like django, check out http://pinaxproject.com/
It builds on top of django and has a lot of common infrastructure
ready to go. It hasn't hit 1.0 yet, but it's shaping up to be quite
nice.
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 8:29 AM, Gordon Dexter <gordon@texasdex.com> wrote:
> I used Django as well, and liked it. �Managed to make a simple web app
> pretty quickly, and next time around I'll be able to make something
> complicated, pretty quickly, since I know how it works now. �If you're a
> fan of the MVC paradigm, Django's a good way to go.
>
> --Gordon
>
> Mag Gam wrote:
>> starting to use Django and its really nice.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Chaz Meyers <plug@thechaz.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 9:11 PM, John Karr <brainbuz@brainbuz.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm starting development on a web based data application. Since this will be
>>>> a fairly large application I would like to select a Framework (ie Django,
>>>> Ruby on Rails, Catalyst) or collection of libraries/modules so that I can
>>>> focus on logic and functionality.
>>>>
>>> If you want to stick with Perl but don't have much programming
>>> experience, I recommend looking at CGI::Application.
>>>
>>> Catalyst is awesome and I believe has a larger community surrounding
>>> it, but it takes advantage of programming concepts and Perl syntax
>>> which may not be familiar to you, so there might be a steeper learning
>>> curve.
>>>
>>> In contrast, in your usual C::A webapp you're just writing a fairly
>>> straightforward class. It's pretty transparent what's going on, and
>>> CGI/Application.pm is fairly understandable to read for someone even
>>> with a little Perl OOP experience. �As you become more experienced,
>>> you have the option of adding more advanced functionality like hooks
>>> and plugins, but none of those are needed when you're getting started.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I plan to take advantage of the fact
>>>> that Postgres supports writing Stored Procedures in PERL to move logic from
>>>> the front-end to the database, which further supports PERL as first choice
>>>> and Python (which is also supported by PostGres) as second choice.
>>>>
>>> I don't know your exact situation so this bit may be completely
>>> irrelevant to you. If you have multiple applications touching the
>>> database, stored procedures can help a lot to eliminate duplication of
>>> logic and ensure data integrity.
>>>
>>> However, if your database is just acting as a data store for your
>>> webapp and you know for a fact that no other application will ever
>>> touch your database directly, it might be smart to keep as much of
>>> your logic in your application as you can. Web nodes are very easy to
>>> scale to multiple machines. Throw a reverse proxy in front of a bunch
>>> of web nodes, and as long as they're not writing session data to disk
>>> you're set. Scaling to a second database machine can be much more
>>> tricky.
>>>
>>> - Chaz Meyers
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Philadelphia Linux Users Group � � � � -- � � � �http://www.phillylinux.org
> Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
> General Discussion �-- � http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
>
--
J.
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|