[Catalyst] Fwd: mvc frameworks in perl

[Matt S Trout]

August R. Wohlt wrote:
> interesting discussion here:
> 
> http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2006/05/mvc_frameworks_in_perl.html
> 
> "Woodstock is the new framework which will be designed by Sebastian
> Riedel to fix "a lot of design mistakes in Catalyst"...
> 
> thoughts?
> 
> :g

Not really, the comment I've already made pretty much sums up my 
opinion. Repeated here for those of you who don't want to trawl through 
the half-assed and badly-researched comments looking for the two or 
three that are actually interesting -

Frank, I'm afraid you're somewhat wrong there - the whole point of 
Catalyst is that it *doesn't* make those choices for you. We have active 
users using at least three different ORMs (DBIx::Class, 
Rose::DB::Object, and a few holdouts still on Class::DBI), a fair few 
using DBI and at least a couple using Tangram. Not to mention the people 
who don't have a database at all and are using Catalyst to talk to LDAP 
or something else entirely different.

Gantry is sort of like a quarter of Catalyst done badly, and Maypole is 
too restrictive and generally only useful for trivial CRUD applications. 
I'd anticipate the perl framework war will become a two or possibly 
three-horse race, with Catalyst for people who want MVC and choice, 
Jifty as a "one true way" non-MVC system and probably an opinionated 
system on top of Catalyst as the "one true way" for MVC. Sebastian's new 
project should be an interesting experimental system but I suspect 
anything useful will probably get rolled into Catalyst by the core team 
(although at the moment we're currently busy refactoring stuff and 
stealing the best bits of Jifty :)

Matt S Trout | May 6, 2006 02:14 PM