[Catalyst] Re: Last Chance / LastDay:Webdevelopmentplatformcontestand Perl / Catalyst

[Nilson Santos Figueiredo Junior]

On 12/4/06, Octavian Rasnita <orasnita at fcc.ro> wrote:
> And I said that there is no de facto standard, because there isn't one
> generally accepted.

There's a defacto standard for writing Catalyst applications.

> The Catalyst users have an opinion, the CGI::App might have another one, the
> Mason users who knows... maybe another one, and so on.
>
> So the newbie might finally start learning Python or Ruby.

And those other languages probably also have choices between
templating systems or ORMs. The thing that actually makes Rails so
successful is the fact that it has everything already sorted out. You
can't really learn Rails without using ActiveRecord for instance.

If the newbie gives up on Catalyst and ends up learning another
language it won't be because of having to learn TT and DBIx::Class
along with Catalyst. It would probably because he's a Windows user and
things don't work as smoothly as the alternatives. Most people don't
really want nor need the flexibility provided by Catalyst, they'd
rather have a pre-packaged framework that just works.

This whole conversation boils down to what are the aims of Catalyst as
an open source project. In order to gain popularity there should be
less focus on flexibility and more focus on "achievability". However,
in most serious developments this won't help much, it'd just be a lot
of work and the only benefits might be a dozen new users - there would
be no real benefits for the existing users and, most importantly, for
the core devs.

-Nilson Santos F. Jr.