Dang Griffith <no*****@noemail4u.com> wrote in message news:<b6******************************@news.terane ws.com>...
On 30 Jan 2004 17:02:30 -0800, ll*****@web.de (Lothar Scholz) wrote:
...http://zope-is-evil-666.idyll.org/
http://www.amk.ca/python/writing/why-not-zope.html
http://pywx.idyll.org/advocacy/why-not-zope.html
I don't know Zope, so feel free to ignore my point, but those articles
are nearly 4 years old. While there might be other reasons, I
wouldn't think old postings necessarily reflect the current version.
Whilst I think that some of the criticism is unfair, if somewhat
amusing in places, Zope does have a reputation as being a particularly
difficult beast for even the most ravenous python( expert)s to
swallow. In other words, it appears as a big system with lots of
unfamiliar techniques in use and, at least until modern times, not
that much documentation to help the uninitiated. That said, once you
get down to writing components, there are some good approaches in
common use which make the process both relatively easy and not so
different to how you would write applications in some of the other
frameworks.
It sometimes seems quite fashionable to trash Zope and hype Twisted,
for example, but the "maze of twisty passages" problem isn't exclusive
to Zope by any means.
Paul
