Setting a compelling goal

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
14 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Setting a compelling goal

Charles Oliver Nutter-2
I understand that you guys are trying to aim for Python compatibility as
a general goal, and I think that's very admirable. It is obviously the
ultimate goal, as is Ruby compatibility for JRuby. I do have a concern
though, and a little story.

JRuby development was largely dead when I joined the project in late
2004. The primary goal at the time was the simple, boring goal of Ruby
1.8 compatibility. And although that was the right direction to be
moving, it was a pretty boring goal. Nobody really cared about running
edge cases and patching bugs for features they weren't using, so no work
was being done.

In late 2005, however, I decided things should start moving in a
different direction: toward specific application support. Rather than
the general goal of Ruby compatibility, it seemed like a much more
exciting and compelling idea to try to make real-world Ruby apps run in
JRuby. The first app was IRB, Ruby's interactive shell. After that,
things started to move very quickly; people saw that there was more to
JRuby than simple "Ruby compatibility"...there was the potential to run
all those amazing Ruby apps under JRuby as well. That's when things
really started moving.

I think Jython should consider a similar approach. Just supporting
Python is not enough of a goal to compel folks to contribute precious
off-hours to the project. Working toward support for apps like Django
would do a lot more for publicity and project interest.

Since changing the direction on JRuby, we've presented at JavaOne and
other conferences, had paid-for speaking engagements, publishers begging
us to do a JRuby book, and of course the Sun hiring. Supporting a
language is good, but setting a goal to support compelling, real-world
apps is much more exciting.

Might this be a good way to raise interest in Jython? A better concrete
goal that people can get excited about?

--
Charles Oliver Nutter, JRuby Core Developer
Blogging on Ruby and Java @ headius.blogspot.com
Help spec out Ruby today! @ www.headius.com/rubyspec
[hidden email] -- [hidden email]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Setting a compelling goal

Kent Johnson
I don't understand the appeal of running Rails in JRuby. Why not just
use Ruby? What is the advantage of running it in JRuby? Why do people
get excited about that? It's a real question, I really don't understand.

I use Jython because I am in a Java shop and I need to integrate with
Java libraries, but I strongly prefer to code in Python. I am much more
interested in language and library upgrades than I am in running Django
in Jython; I would like to be able to write generators and use os.walk()
and path.py and the csv module. Making Jython compatible with Python 2.2
or greater will also mean I can use more third-party modules.

Another popular use of Jython is to add a scripting capability to a Java
program; here again I think library and language upgrades are worth more
than the ability to run a specific application.

Of course to get Django to run you would have to implement much of
Python 2.4 so if that is what gets people excited to get on board I'm
all for it. I just don't get it, that's all.

One difference between JRuby and Jython is that JRuby haa a static
target to shoot for - Ruby 1.8. Anything you can do to get Rails running
must be a step towards that target.

In Jython's case, there are four possible targets, Python 2.2-2.5. I
think there is significant value in picking one to shoot for - if Jython
had a mix of features from all those versions it could be pretty confusing.

Just my $0.02
Kent

Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:

> I understand that you guys are trying to aim for Python compatibility as
> a general goal, and I think that's very admirable. It is obviously the
> ultimate goal, as is Ruby compatibility for JRuby. I do have a concern
> though, and a little story.
>
> JRuby development was largely dead when I joined the project in late
> 2004. The primary goal at the time was the simple, boring goal of Ruby
> 1.8 compatibility. And although that was the right direction to be
> moving, it was a pretty boring goal. Nobody really cared about running
> edge cases and patching bugs for features they weren't using, so no work
> was being done.
>
> In late 2005, however, I decided things should start moving in a
> different direction: toward specific application support. Rather than
> the general goal of Ruby compatibility, it seemed like a much more
> exciting and compelling idea to try to make real-world Ruby apps run in
> JRuby. The first app was IRB, Ruby's interactive shell. After that,
> things started to move very quickly; people saw that there was more to
> JRuby than simple "Ruby compatibility"...there was the potential to run
> all those amazing Ruby apps under JRuby as well. That's when things
> really started moving.
>
> I think Jython should consider a similar approach. Just supporting
> Python is not enough of a goal to compel folks to contribute precious
> off-hours to the project. Working toward support for apps like Django
> would do a lot more for publicity and project interest.
>
> Since changing the direction on JRuby, we've presented at JavaOne and
> other conferences, had paid-for speaking engagements, publishers begging
> us to do a JRuby book, and of course the Sun hiring. Supporting a
> language is good, but setting a goal to support compelling, real-world
> apps is much more exciting.
>
> Might this be a good way to raise interest in Jython? A better concrete
> goal that people can get excited about?
>



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Setting a compelling goal

Leo User
As someone who has ported a python app to jython this
is compelling.  Unless you've had to suffer through
trying to get central machinery to work, it may not be
apparent.

As to why you want to do Rails in JRuby?
1. Great mountains of Java libraries.
2. Potentially better performance.  Ruby puts behind
the other languages.  I assume Rails puts behind other
frameworks because of this.

Im sure there are other reasons as well,
leouser

--- Kent Johnson <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I don't understand the appeal of running Rails in
> JRuby. Why not just
> use Ruby? What is the advantage of running it in
> JRuby? Why do people
> get excited about that? It's a real question, I
> really don't understand.
>
> I use Jython because I am in a Java shop and I need
> to integrate with
> Java libraries, but I strongly prefer to code in
> Python. I am much more
> interested in language and library upgrades than I
> am in running Django
> in Jython; I would like to be able to write
> generators and use os.walk()
> and path.py and the csv module. Making Jython
> compatible with Python 2.2
> or greater will also mean I can use more third-party
> modules.
>
> Another popular use of Jython is to add a scripting
> capability to a Java
> program; here again I think library and language
> upgrades are worth more
> than the ability to run a specific application.
>
> Of course to get Django to run you would have to
> implement much of
> Python 2.4 so if that is what gets people excited to
> get on board I'm
> all for it. I just don't get it, that's all.
>
> One difference between JRuby and Jython is that
> JRuby haa a static
> target to shoot for - Ruby 1.8. Anything you can do
> to get Rails running
> must be a step towards that target.
>
> In Jython's case, there are four possible targets,
> Python 2.2-2.5. I
> think there is significant value in picking one to
> shoot for - if Jython
> had a mix of features from all those versions it
> could be pretty confusing.
>
> Just my $0.02
> Kent
>
> Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
> > I understand that you guys are trying to aim for
> Python compatibility as
> > a general goal, and I think that's very admirable.
> It is obviously the
> > ultimate goal, as is Ruby compatibility for JRuby.
> I do have a concern
> > though, and a little story.
> >
> > JRuby development was largely dead when I joined
> the project in late
> > 2004. The primary goal at the time was the simple,
> boring goal of Ruby
> > 1.8 compatibility. And although that was the right
> direction to be
> > moving, it was a pretty boring goal. Nobody really
> cared about running
> > edge cases and patching bugs for features they
> weren't using, so no work
> > was being done.
> >
> > In late 2005, however, I decided things should
> start moving in a
> > different direction: toward specific application
> support. Rather than
> > the general goal of Ruby compatibility, it seemed
> like a much more
> > exciting and compelling idea to try to make
> real-world Ruby apps run in
> > JRuby. The first app was IRB, Ruby's interactive
> shell. After that,
> > things started to move very quickly; people saw
> that there was more to
> > JRuby than simple "Ruby compatibility"...there was
> the potential to run
> > all those amazing Ruby apps under JRuby as well.
> That's when things
> > really started moving.
> >
> > I think Jython should consider a similar approach.
> Just supporting
> > Python is not enough of a goal to compel folks to
> contribute precious
> > off-hours to the project. Working toward support
> for apps like Django
> > would do a lot more for publicity and project
> interest.
> >
> > Since changing the direction on JRuby, we've
> presented at JavaOne and
> > other conferences, had paid-for speaking
> engagements, publishers begging
> > us to do a JRuby book, and of course the Sun
> hiring. Supporting a
> > language is good, but setting a goal to support
> compelling, real-world
> > apps is much more exciting.
> >
> > Might this be a good way to raise interest in
> Jython? A better concrete
> > goal that people can get excited about?
> >
>
>
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get
> the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief
> surveys - and earn cash
>
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Jython-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
>



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sponsored Link

Mortgage rates near 39yr lows.
$510k for $1,698/mo. Calculate new payment!
www.LowerMyBills.com/lre

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Setting a compelling goal

Charles Oliver Nutter-2
In reply to this post by Kent Johnson
Kent Johnson wrote:
 > I don't understand the appeal of running Rails in JRuby. Why not just
use Ruby? What is the advantage of running it in JRuby? Why do people
get excited about that? It's a real question, I really don't understand.

Rails only supports one request at a time, one app at a time, in a given
Ruby process. This is largely driven by the limitations of the current
Ruby implementation which is green threaded, and by the design of the
Rails framework, which uses metaprogramming techniques heavily to
generate app-specific code at runtime. The advantage to running Rails
under JRuby are manifold, but to list a few: scaling across processes
without multiple processes; hosting multiple independent apps in the
same server process; all the Java EE stuff like clustering, failover,
management, monitoring; high-performance database support across all
JDBC-supported databases; potentially much better performance in core
libraries (existing optimized Java code) and in Ruby code (once we
overcome our remaining performance issues and start compiling to
bytecode). The list goes on...but it's going to be way more scalable and
way easier to deploy Rails with JRuby than it is with the C implementation.

 > I use Jython because I am in a Java shop and I need to integrate with
Java libraries, but I strongly prefer to code in Python. I am much more
interested in language and library upgrades than I am in running Django
in Jython; I would like to be able to write generators and use os.walk()
and path.py and the csv module. Making Jython compatible with Python 2.2
or greater will also mean I can use more third-party modules.

That's perfectly valid too...and it's the other half of the JRuby story.
As we become more and more stable and more and more compatible, people
have started to use Ruby for more and more of what tey might have used
JRuby for before.

 > Another popular use of Jython is to add a scripting capability to a
Java program; here again I think library and language upgrades are worth
more than the ability to run a specific application.
 >
 > Of course to get Django to run you would have to implement much of
Python 2.4 so if that is what gets people excited to get on board I'm
all for it. I just don't get it, that's all.

Perhaps you have no desire to run Django? There are many people who do
want to run it, but who perhaps can't get Python into their Java-only
organization or who can't deal with the infrastructure changes to get
there. For them, Django-on-JVM would be extremely interesting, and I agree.

It would also be more likely to drive people to Jython that want to run
apps like Django but live in a Java world. If they could say that Django
would run within their current infrastructure without modifications, it
opens up a whole new world of development.

The truth of the Java world is that after all these years, web
application development is still as painful as ever. Frameworks like
Django and Rails are solving that pain on other platforms. Projects like
JRuby and Jython can bring those solutions to the people who need them
most: the armies of Java developers hating web development today.

 > One difference between JRuby and Jython is that JRuby haa a static
target to shoot for - Ruby 1.8. Anything you can do to get Rails running
must be a step towards that target.
 >
 > In Jython's case, there are four possible targets, Python 2.2-2.5. I
think there is significant value in picking one to shoot for - if Jython
had a mix of features from all those versions it could be pretty confusing.

Perhaps there are a lot of people who really want Python 2.2-only
compatibility. That would seem weird to me, but I don't know how the
Python world works. What I do know is that the really compelling,
buzz-worthy applications for Python require higher version
compatibility, and working to support those apps is likely to drive
development faster than just general "Python version X" support.

--
Charles Oliver Nutter, JRuby Core Developer
Blogging on Ruby and Java @ headius.blogspot.com
Help spec out Ruby today! @ www.headius.com/rubyspec
[hidden email] -- [hidden email]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Setting a compelling goal

Charles Oliver Nutter-2
Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
> generate app-specific code at runtime. The advantage to running Rails
> under JRuby are manifold, but to list a few: scaling across processes
> without multiple processes; hosting multiple independent apps in the

That's scaling across processors, of course...

--
Charles Oliver Nutter, JRuby Core Developer
Blogging on Ruby and Java @ headius.blogspot.com
Help spec out Ruby today! @ www.headius.com/rubyspec
[hidden email] -- [hidden email]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Setting a compelling goal

Charlie Groves
In reply to this post by Charles Oliver Nutter-2
While I can see how having a really specific goal could help spur on
new development, I'm not sure it makes as much sense for Jython as it
does for JRuby.

For one, I wouldn't know how to choose the application.  There's no
single thing in the Python world to target like Rails for Ruby.  Of
course there are all sorts of cool things going on in Ruby, but Rails
is obviously the killer app.  Even with Guido's stamp of approval,
Django doesn't get mentioned without TurboGears (and now Pylons)
coming up.

Mainly though, I feel like we're close enough to the goal of 2.2 that
setting milestones along the way isn't as important.  Having a visible
goal that's getting closer is as important for the people working on
the project as it is for the people outside of it.  From what I
understand, JRuby was pretty far out from 1.8 when you started on it.
I think Jython has suffered in the past because the changes for 2.2
are so large.  Luckily for me, Samuele had knocked out the new style
class work by the time I got here so I could see what was left from
the start and stay motivated.  By choosing to go for 2.3 instead of
directly to 2.5 we're not going to make the same mistake again.

Charlie

On 11/17/06, Charles Oliver Nutter <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I understand that you guys are trying to aim for Python compatibility as
> a general goal, and I think that's very admirable. It is obviously the
> ultimate goal, as is Ruby compatibility for JRuby. I do have a concern
> though, and a little story.
>
> JRuby development was largely dead when I joined the project in late
> 2004. The primary goal at the time was the simple, boring goal of Ruby
> 1.8 compatibility. And although that was the right direction to be
> moving, it was a pretty boring goal. Nobody really cared about running
> edge cases and patching bugs for features they weren't using, so no work
> was being done.
>
> In late 2005, however, I decided things should start moving in a
> different direction: toward specific application support. Rather than
> the general goal of Ruby compatibility, it seemed like a much more
> exciting and compelling idea to try to make real-world Ruby apps run in
> JRuby. The first app was IRB, Ruby's interactive shell. After that,
> things started to move very quickly; people saw that there was more to
> JRuby than simple "Ruby compatibility"...there was the potential to run
> all those amazing Ruby apps under JRuby as well. That's when things
> really started moving.
>
> I think Jython should consider a similar approach. Just supporting
> Python is not enough of a goal to compel folks to contribute precious
> off-hours to the project. Working toward support for apps like Django
> would do a lot more for publicity and project interest.
>
> Since changing the direction on JRuby, we've presented at JavaOne and
> other conferences, had paid-for speaking engagements, publishers begging
> us to do a JRuby book, and of course the Sun hiring. Supporting a
> language is good, but setting a goal to support compelling, real-world
> apps is much more exciting.
>
> Might this be a good way to raise interest in Jython? A better concrete
> goal that people can get excited about?
>
> --
> Charles Oliver Nutter, JRuby Core Developer
> Blogging on Ruby and Java @ headius.blogspot.com
> Help spec out Ruby today! @ www.headius.com/rubyspec
> [hidden email] -- [hidden email]
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Jython-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Setting a compelling goal

Sean McGrath
In reply to this post by Charles Oliver Nutter-2
Charles,

I think that is an excellent idea. Given that I am on the apps end
of the Jython dev spectrum folks might think "well, he would say
that wouldn't he" but please hear me out.

In order to make compelling-end-user-app Django/Turbogears/Plone (whatever)
work well, lots and lots of stuff will need to be done at the jython
internals
level.

Charles's suggestion creates a *reason* for doing this work that can
be explained to non-technical people. This is very important for
a lot of technical people who need to "sell" the idea of them spending
time on Jython in order to get the time/space to do so.

"We are making Django/Turbogears/Plone (whatever) work in
an enterprise application server environment" is one such phrase :-)

It might even help me in the not-too-distant future make a case
at my shop for some resources to spend time on Jython.

What compelling application to focus on? Well, personally I don't
use relational database-y stuff very much being genetically a dochead.
However, I think a compelling case can be made for saying
that the compelling application should be relational database-y in nature.
After all (a) the majority of "normal" developers spend their days there
and (b)
there is lots of Java sprayed over those sort of environments at
present. Environments
that could benefit greatly from some Jython.

Mind-share is another important factor of course. The least risky path
is to pick an app that already has a bandwagon rather than try
to form a new one.

With that in mind, I would suggest that the focus should be
either Django or TurboGears.

My 2 cent(Euro),

Sean


Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:

> I understand that you guys are trying to aim for Python compatibility as
> a general goal, and I think that's very admirable. It is obviously the
> ultimate goal, as is Ruby compatibility for JRuby. I do have a concern
> though, and a little story.
>
> JRuby development was largely dead when I joined the project in late
> 2004. The primary goal at the time was the simple, boring goal of Ruby
> 1.8 compatibility. And although that was the right direction to be
> moving, it was a pretty boring goal. Nobody really cared about running
> edge cases and patching bugs for features they weren't using, so no work
> was being done.
>
> In late 2005, however, I decided things should start moving in a
> different direction: toward specific application support. Rather than
> the general goal of Ruby compatibility, it seemed like a much more
> exciting and compelling idea to try to make real-world Ruby apps run in
> JRuby. The first app was IRB, Ruby's interactive shell. After that,
> things started to move very quickly; people saw that there was more to
> JRuby than simple "Ruby compatibility"...there was the potential to run
> all those amazing Ruby apps under JRuby as well. That's when things
> really started moving.
>
> I think Jython should consider a similar approach. Just supporting
> Python is not enough of a goal to compel folks to contribute precious
> off-hours to the project. Working toward support for apps like Django
> would do a lot more for publicity and project interest.
>
> Since changing the direction on JRuby, we've presented at JavaOne and
> other conferences, had paid-for speaking engagements, publishers begging
> us to do a JRuby book, and of course the Sun hiring. Supporting a
> language is good, but setting a goal to support compelling, real-world
> apps is much more exciting.
>
> Might this be a good way to raise interest in Jython? A better concrete
> goal that people can get excited about?
>
>  


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Setting a compelling goal

Kent Johnson
Sean McGrath wrote:
> What compelling application to focus on? Well, personally I don't
> use relational database-y stuff very much being genetically a dochead.
> However, I think a compelling case can be made for saying
> that the compelling application should be relational database-y in nature.
> After all (a) the majority of "normal" developers spend their days there
> and (b)
> there is lots of Java sprayed over those sort of environments at
> present. Environments
> that could benefit greatly from some Jython.

This suggests SQLObject or SQLAlchemy as a target.
>
> Mind-share is another important factor of course. The least risky path
> is to pick an app that already has a bandwagon rather than try
> to form a new one.
>
> With that in mind, I would suggest that the focus should be
> either Django or TurboGears.

A possible advantage of targeting TurboGears is TG's architecture as a
collection of other components. Targeting TG would mean first getting
CherryPy, SQLObject and Kid working in Jython. These are each useful in
their own right and the effort could be split across time or developers
with different people focusing on different sub-projects.

Kent



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Setting a compelling goal

Charles Oliver Nutter-2
Kent Johnson wrote:
> A possible advantage of targeting TurboGears is TG's architecture as a
> collection of other components. Targeting TG would mean first getting
> CherryPy, SQLObject and Kid working in Jython. These are each useful in
> their own right and the effort could be split across time or developers
> with different people focusing on different sub-projects.

It's sounding like TG might be the better option. You guys are the
pythonistas, so obviously you'd know better than me. I'd definitely say
making the target something webby and CRUDdy would be the best focus,
and I'll reiterate why:

Java webapp development sucks.

There's really no two ways about it. After all these years, it's still
just as painful as ever, though now in many cases it's well-specified
pain with XML schemas, heavy tooling, and code generation attached.
However pain is pain, and practically nobody enjoys working on Java
webapps today.

Django or Turbogears can be, just like Rails, a final savior for web
development on Java. And that's the selling point that can start drawing
in those same Java web developers that are leaving for dynlang
frameworks in droves. "You don't have to leave your cushy Java shop job
just because you hate web development; help us get DJ/TG working and
enlightenment is yours."

So perhaps TG-on-JVM could be the "killer app" for Python?

There's also one other solid motivation for y'all: IronPython can't run
either yet.

--
Charles Oliver Nutter, JRuby Core Developer
Blogging on Ruby and Java @ headius.blogspot.com
Help spec out Ruby today! @ www.headius.com/rubyspec
[hidden email] -- [hidden email]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Setting a compelling goal

Steve Lewis-4
+1 for Turbogears.

We're a Java shop and we started doing some of our
stuff in Django, but TG sounds like it'd be easier to
swallow smaller pieces at a time (that way jython
would avoid the swallowing-large-chunks-at-one-time of
the 2.2 rev).

I still wanna see Django on jython, though. ;)
Steve

--- Charles Oliver Nutter <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Kent Johnson wrote:
> > A possible advantage of targeting TurboGears is
> TG's architecture as a
> > collection of other components. Targeting TG would
> mean first getting
> > CherryPy, SQLObject and Kid working in Jython.
> These are each useful in
> > their own right and the effort could be split
> across time or developers
> > with different people focusing on different
> sub-projects.
>
> It's sounding like TG might be the better option.
> You guys are the
> pythonistas, so obviously you'd know better than me.
> I'd definitely say
> making the target something webby and CRUDdy would
> be the best focus,
> and I'll reiterate why:
>
> Java webapp development sucks.
>
> There's really no two ways about it. After all these
> years, it's still
> just as painful as ever, though now in many cases
> it's well-specified
> pain with XML schemas, heavy tooling, and code
> generation attached.
> However pain is pain, and practically nobody enjoys
> working on Java
> webapps today.
>
> Django or Turbogears can be, just like Rails, a
> final savior for web
> development on Java. And that's the selling point
> that can start drawing
> in those same Java web developers that are leaving
> for dynlang
> frameworks in droves. "You don't have to leave your
> cushy Java shop job
> just because you hate web development; help us get
> DJ/TG working and
> enlightenment is yours."
>
> So perhaps TG-on-JVM could be the "killer app" for
> Python?
>
> There's also one other solid motivation for y'all:
> IronPython can't run
> either yet.
>
> --
> Charles Oliver Nutter, JRuby Core Developer
> Blogging on Ruby and Java @ headius.blogspot.com
> Help spec out Ruby today! @ www.headius.com/rubyspec
> [hidden email] -- [hidden email]
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get
> the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief
> surveys - and earn cash
>
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Jython-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
>



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sponsored Link

Compare mortgage rates for today.
Get up to 5 free quotes.
Www2.nextag.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Setting a compelling goal

fwierzbicki@gmail.com
In reply to this post by Charles Oliver Nutter-2
> It's sounding like TG might be the better option. You guys are the
> pythonistas, so obviously you'd know better than me. I'd definitely say
> making the target something webby and CRUDdy would be the best focus,
> and I'll reiterate why:
I think this is a very good idea, at least for 2.3 development (2.2
should stilll concentrate exclusively on releasing since it is so
close).  I think TG probably is the easiest, since it is more easily
developed incrementally.  We might also consider Twisted (using Alan
Kennedy's select implementation
http://www.xhaus.com/alan/python/jynio/select.html)

And of course Django is a nice target as well.  We probably don't have
to target just one app.  I'm pretty sure TG uses SqlObject
http://www.sqlobject.org/, and about a year ago a tried SQLObject with
Jython and had some success with simple CRUD.

-Frank

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Setting a compelling goal

Yan Weng
Agree. And we don't even need to port TG as a whole at the beginning. Porting SQLObject to Jython could deliver value to Java/Jython  community and attract enough attention.

Just my $0.02.

 
On 11/18/06, Frank Wierzbicki <[hidden email]> wrote:
> It's sounding like TG might be the better option. You guys are the
> pythonistas, so obviously you'd know better than me. I'd definitely say
> making the target something webby and CRUDdy would be the best focus,
> and I'll reiterate why:
I think this is a very good idea, at least for 2.3 development (2.2
should stilll concentrate exclusively on releasing since it is so
close).  I think TG probably is the easiest, since it is more easily
developed incrementally.  We might also consider Twisted (using Alan
Kennedy's select implementation
http://www.xhaus.com/alan/python/jynio/select.html )

And of course Django is a nice target as well.  We probably don't have
to target just one app.  I'm pretty sure TG uses SqlObject
http://www.sqlobject.org/, and about a year ago a tried SQLObject with
Jython and had some success with simple CRUD.

-Frank

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net 's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Setting a compelling goal

Charlie Groves
I think TurboGears is moving away from SQLObject to SQLAlchemy(and
from Kid to Genshi) for their 1.1 version.  I know they haven't
reached 1.0 yet, but it would suck if we got enough together to
support TurboGears 1.0 and they released 1.1 with different
dependencies immediately afterwards.  I can hear the comments now,
"Ah, a version behind, just like Jython."  Anyway, SQLAlchemy is way
cooler than SQLObject :)

On a different tack, I just searched for WSGI and jython and came up
with http://www.xhaus.com/modjy/index.html  Has anyone used this?  If
it's any good and we pick a WSGI compliant framework, we'd have a good
server done already.  Where do Django and TurboGears stand with
regards to WSGI?

Charlie



On 11/18/06, Yan Weng <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Agree. And we don't even need to port TG as a whole at the beginning.
> Porting SQLObject to Jython could deliver value to Java/Jython  community
> and attract enough attention.
>
> Just my $0.02.
>
>
>
>  On 11/18/06, Frank Wierzbicki <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > It's sounding like TG might be the better option. You guys are the
> > > pythonistas, so obviously you'd know better than me. I'd definitely say
> > > making the target something webby and CRUDdy would be the best focus,
> > > and I'll reiterate why:
> > I think this is a very good idea, at least for 2.3 development (2.2
> > should stilll concentrate exclusively on releasing since it is so
> > close).  I think TG probably is the easiest, since it is more easily
> > developed incrementally.  We might also consider Twisted (using Alan
> > Kennedy's select implementation
> > http://www.xhaus.com/alan/python/jynio/select.html )
> >
> > And of course Django is a nice target as well.  We probably don't have
> > to target just one app.  I'm pretty sure TG uses SqlObject
> > http://www.sqlobject.org/, and about a year ago a tried SQLObject with
> > Jython and had some success with simple CRUD.
> >
> > -Frank
> >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> > Join SourceForge.net 's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
> your
> > opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> >
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> > _______________________________________________
> > Jython-dev mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
> >
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jython-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
>
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Setting a compelling goal

Charles Oliver Nutter-2
Charlie Groves wrote:
> I think TurboGears is moving away from SQLObject to SQLAlchemy(and
> from Kid to Genshi) for their 1.1 version.  I know they haven't
> reached 1.0 yet, but it would suck if we got enough together to
> support TurboGears 1.0 and they released 1.1 with different
> dependencies immediately afterwards.  I can hear the comments now,
> "Ah, a version behind, just like Jython."  Anyway, SQLAlchemy is way
> cooler than SQLObject :)

Since this probably isn't going to happen in a day, I'd say to shoot for
1.1. We haven't been shooting too far ahead for Rails mainly because
it's almost all pure Ruby and future versions aren't likely to have new
issues on current JRuby. But in your case, since this effort is just
starting, 1.1 is probably the better target.

--
Charles Oliver Nutter, JRuby Core Developer
Blogging on Ruby and Java @ headius.blogspot.com
Help spec out Ruby today! @ www.headius.com/rubyspec
[hidden email] -- [hidden email]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev