Re: Language wars...

["Chris Travers" <..hidden..>]

On 1/24/07, Ed W <..hidden..> wrote:

> My 2p is that people assume that because an ORM is provided that you
> have to use it.  I have a bunch of code which uses a Rails Model which
> doesn't even attach to a database at all... See it's not just for ORM
>
> I think in the Perl case that frameworks like Catalyst are even less
> tied to the ORM concept and like you said below you can use TT for the
> V, anything you like for the M and a bunch of free hooking provided by
> the framework.

We are aware of this.  However, we basically discovered that our
design was basically a lightweight MVC anyway, and that a large and
complex framework like Catalyst would add limited value and a lot of
complexity.  I suppose that as this develops, if there is a need to
reconsider, we probably will.
> I'm not trying to force anything on anyway, just trying to point out
> that you seem to be overlooking these frameworks for a reason which is
> not necessarily valid
I welcome the input as I am sure the rest of the core team does.

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers