librelist archives

« back to archive

Is Flask Production ready?

Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 18:03
Hi,

I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the Documentation
that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about many people
using the framework for production.
I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version and if
it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production websites
using it.


Thanks

-- 
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Cobalys Systems
http://www.cobalys.com

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Markus Unterwaditzer
Date:
2012-11-21 @ 12:32
Straight from Flask's readme:

>    ~ Is it ready?
>
>      It's still not 1.0 but it's shaping up nicely and is
>      already widely used.  Consider the API to slightly
>      improve over time but we don't plan on breaking it.

In other words, your application won't crash in production because of Flask,
unless you didn't read the changelog while updating it.

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 04:03:06PM -0200, Serge G. Spaolonzi wrote:
>    Hi,
>    I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the Documentation
>    that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about many people
>    using the framework for production. 
>    I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version and if
>    it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production
>    websites using it.
>    Thanks
>    --
>    Serge G. Spaolonzi
>    Cobalys Systems
>    [1]http://www.cobalys.com
> 
> References
> 
>    Visible links
>    1. http://www.cobalys.com/

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Simon Zimmermann
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 22:14
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com> wrote:
> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the Documentation
> that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about many people using
> the framework for production.

The question can also be turned on its head. What is "production
ready" (for you/your organization)? What kind of requirements do you
have? Stability, correctness etc.

I would argue that Flask/Werkzeug correctly is labeled as a 0.x
release and not a 1.0. There are many bugs (see issue tracker's) which
should be fixed for this software to be considered "stable" (as in
1.0). However, this does not mean that Flask/Werkzeug isn't to be
considered "production ready".

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Joe Esposito <espo58@gmail.com> wrote:
> There's the "opposite of buggy" in which case, yes, Flask is very stable.
> Simply because the grunt work is in the two highly-reliable dependencies:
> Jinja2 and Werkzeug.

As an example, Werkzeug actually has 93 Open issues (140 closed). I'm
not saying that these all are bugs, or that having xx open issues
correlate to buggy software. Labeling Flask as "very" stable and
werkzeug as "highly-reliable" is in my opinion misleading.

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Joe Esposito
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 22:37
> Labeling Flask as "very" stable and werkzeug as "highly-reliable" is in
my opinion misleading.

Fair enough. Let me prefix it with: "In my personal experience of using
Flask for the past year and a half."

Were you personally bitten by one of these issue?

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Simon Zimmermann <simon@insmo.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>
> wrote:
> > I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the
> Documentation
> > that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about many people
> using
> > the framework for production.
>
> The question can also be turned on its head. What is "production
> ready" (for you/your organization)? What kind of requirements do you
> have? Stability, correctness etc.
>
> I would argue that Flask/Werkzeug correctly is labeled as a 0.x
> release and not a 1.0. There are many bugs (see issue tracker's) which
> should be fixed for this software to be considered "stable" (as in
> 1.0). However, this does not mean that Flask/Werkzeug isn't to be
> considered "production ready".
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Joe Esposito <espo58@gmail.com> wrote:
> > There's the "opposite of buggy" in which case, yes, Flask is very stable.
> > Simply because the grunt work is in the two highly-reliable dependencies:
> > Jinja2 and Werkzeug.
>
> As an example, Werkzeug actually has 93 Open issues (140 closed). I'm
> not saying that these all are bugs, or that having xx open issues
> correlate to buggy software. Labeling Flask as "very" stable and
> werkzeug as "highly-reliable" is in my opinion misleading.
>

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
kracekumar ramaraju
Date:
2012-11-21 @ 16:20
On Nov 21, 2012 4:09 AM, "Joe Esposito" <espo58@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Labeling Flask as "very" stable and werkzeug as "highly-reliable" is in
my opinion misleading.
>
> Fair enough. Let me prefix it with: "In my personal experience of using
Flask for the past year and a half."
>
> Were you personally bitten by one of these issue?

I am happy wit flask so far, its my defacto framework.

I have bitten once for having 3 dynamic component in routing.

@app.route('/<name>/<playlist>/<video>')

Workaround is

@app.route('/<name>/<playlist>/videos/<video>')

> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Simon Zimmermann <simon@insmo.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>
wrote:
>> > I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the
Documentation
>> > that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about many people
using
>> > the framework for production.
>>
>> The question can also be turned on its head. What is "production
>> ready" (for you/your organization)? What kind of requirements do you
>> have? Stability, correctness etc.
>>
>> I would argue that Flask/Werkzeug correctly is labeled as a 0.x
>> release and not a 1.0. There are many bugs (see issue tracker's) which
>> should be fixed for this software to be considered "stable" (as in
>> 1.0). However, this does not mean that Flask/Werkzeug isn't to be
>> considered "production ready".
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Joe Esposito <espo58@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > There's the "opposite of buggy" in which case, yes, Flask is very
stable.
>> > Simply because the grunt work is in the two highly-reliable
dependencies:
>> > Jinja2 and Werkzeug.
>>
>> As an example, Werkzeug actually has 93 Open issues (140 closed). I'm
>> not saying that these all are bugs, or that having xx open issues
>> correlate to buggy software. Labeling Flask as "very" stable and
>> werkzeug as "highly-reliable" is in my opinion misleading.
>
>

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Simon Zimmermann
Date:
2012-11-21 @ 11:00
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Joe Esposito <espo58@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Labeling Flask as "very" stable and werkzeug as "highly-reliable" is in my
>> opinion misleading.
>
> Fair enough. Let me prefix it with: "In my personal experience of using
> Flask for the past year and a half."
>
> Were you personally bitten by one of these issue?

Personal anecdotes make bad arguments.

I was more surprised by the argumentation of how stable etc Flask et
al is when there are obvious issues yet to be resolved. I haven't
looked that closely on the underlying code-bases, but when I've looked
I've found some bugs (unconfirmed[1][2]) in core parts of the
software.

[1]: https://github.com/mitsuhiko/werkzeug/issues/233
[2]: https://github.com/mitsuhiko/werkzeug/pull/205

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Joe Esposito
Date:
2012-11-21 @ 15:16
> *I was more surprised by the argumentation of how stable etc Flask et al
is when there are obvious issues yet to be resolved.*

From what you're saying, Chrome isn't production ready either.
They have about  <http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/list>33566
open <http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/list>
issues <http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/list>, with a total of
148961.

> *Personal anecdotes make bad arguments.*

When evaluating a new framework, I happen to find a lot of value in others'
personal experience.
When you're new, there's no mechanical way to know if N issues are merely
edge cases or potential
road-blockers. And researching *every* issue and every alternative
framework is simply infeasible.

On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 6:00 AM, Simon Zimmermann <simon@insmo.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Joe Esposito <espo58@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Labeling Flask as "very" stable and werkzeug as "highly-reliable" is in
> my
> >> opinion misleading.
> >
> > Fair enough. Let me prefix it with: "In my personal experience of using
> > Flask for the past year and a half."
> >
> > Were you personally bitten by one of these issue?
>
> Personal anecdotes make bad arguments.
>
> I was more surprised by the argumentation of how stable etc Flask et
> al is when there are obvious issues yet to be resolved. I haven't
> looked that closely on the underlying code-bases, but when I've looked
> I've found some bugs (unconfirmed[1][2]) in core parts of the
> software.
>
> [1]: https://github.com/mitsuhiko/werkzeug/issues/233
> [2]: https://github.com/mitsuhiko/werkzeug/pull/205
>

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Edd Robinson
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 18:20
According to your website, you're "web development experts", so you can 
work that out for yourself, right?

Nice trolling.


On 20 Nov 2012, at 18:03, Serge G. Spaolonzi wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the 
Documentation that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about 
many people using the framework for production. 
> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version and 
if it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production 
websites using it.
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> -- 
> Serge G. Spaolonzi
> Cobalys Systems
> http://www.cobalys.com
> 

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
pronoyc@gmail.com
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 18:24
> According to your website, you're "web development experts", so you can
> work that out for yourself, right?
>

BURN!

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Joe Esposito
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 18:46
> *I wonder if there is anyone who's made a website like builtwithflask.com*

There's the "Powered By" section of the website:
http://flask.pocoo.org/community/poweredby/

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
pronoyc@gmail.com
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 18:51
> There's the "Powered By" section of the website:
> http://flask.pocoo.org/community/poweredby/
>

Nice.

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 18:43
It is not my intention to offend you. As I have expressed in a
previous mail it is not very clear.
For example in the The Python Package Index (PyPI) it clearly says the
project is in Beta status.

All I wanted to know is if the project is stable or not.

Thanks

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Edd Robinson <me@eddrobinson.net> wrote:
> According to your website, you're "web development experts", so you can 
work that out for yourself, right?
>
> Nice trolling.
>
>
> On 20 Nov 2012, at 18:03, Serge G. Spaolonzi wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the 
Documentation that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about 
many people using the framework for production.
>> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version and
if it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production 
websites using it.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> --
>> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>> Cobalys Systems
>> http://www.cobalys.com
>>
>



-- 
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Cobalys Systems
http://www.cobalys.com

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
pronoyc@gmail.com
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 18:48
Okay, let's end this by telling you. It is incredibly stable. It's been
used in production by me and many other people. The extensions and the
whole framework itself is very well built and with every new release it
becomes better.

Hope this satisfied you.


On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>wrote:

> It is not my intention to offend you. As I have expressed in a
> previous mail it is not very clear.
> For example in the The Python Package Index (PyPI) it clearly says the
> project is in Beta status.
>
> All I wanted to know is if the project is stable or not.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Edd Robinson <me@eddrobinson.net> wrote:
> > According to your website, you're "web development experts", so you can
> work that out for yourself, right?
> >
> > Nice trolling.
> >
> >
> > On 20 Nov 2012, at 18:03, Serge G. Spaolonzi wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the
> Documentation that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about
> many people using the framework for production.
> >> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version and
> if it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production
> websites using it.
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> --
> >> Serge G. Spaolonzi
> >> Cobalys Systems
> >> http://www.cobalys.com
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Serge G. Spaolonzi
> Cobalys Systems
> http://www.cobalys.com
>



-- 
Regards,

Pronoy Chopra
http://blog.pronoy.in <http://www.pronoy.in/about>/
http://www.twitter.com/pronoyc

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Joe Esposito
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 19:09
However, "stability" has two meanings.

There's the "opposite of buggy" in which case, yes, Flask is *very* stable.
Simply because the grunt work is in the two highly-reliable dependencies:
Jinja2 and Werkzeug.

But then there's also "dependency stability," meaning Flask's API won't
change. I think having flask still be in "beta" reserves the right to make
breaking changes when it reaches 1.0.
Flask really is widely used though. There's already a lot of pressure to
not make any breaking changes. Additionally, Armin is really good about
this, so I think versioning semantics aside, you'll be just fine.

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:48 PM, pronoyc@gmail.com <pronoyc@gmail.com>wrote:

> Okay, let's end this by telling you. It is incredibly stable. It's been
> used in production by me and many other people. The extensions and the
> whole framework itself is very well built and with every new release it
> becomes better.
>
> Hope this satisfied you.
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>wrote:
>
>> It is not my intention to offend you. As I have expressed in a
>> previous mail it is not very clear.
>> For example in the The Python Package Index (PyPI) it clearly says the
>> project is in Beta status.
>>
>> All I wanted to know is if the project is stable or not.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Edd Robinson <me@eddrobinson.net> wrote:
>> > According to your website, you're "web development experts", so you can
>> work that out for yourself, right?
>> >
>> > Nice trolling.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 20 Nov 2012, at 18:03, Serge G. Spaolonzi wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the
>> Documentation that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about
>> many people using the framework for production.
>> >> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version
>> and if it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production
>> websites using it.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>> >> Cobalys Systems
>> >> http://www.cobalys.com
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>> Cobalys Systems
>> http://www.cobalys.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Pronoy Chopra
> http://blog.pronoy.in <http://www.pronoy.in/about>/
> http://www.twitter.com/pronoyc
>
>

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 19:33
Thanks. I already know Jinja2 and it is the reason I started to think
about using Flask in the first place.

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Joe Esposito <espo58@gmail.com> wrote:
> However, "stability" has two meanings.
>
> There's the "opposite of buggy" in which case, yes, Flask is very stable.
> Simply because the grunt work is in the two highly-reliable dependencies:
> Jinja2 and Werkzeug.
>
> But then there's also "dependency stability," meaning Flask's API won't
> change. I think having flask still be in "beta" reserves the right to make
> breaking changes when it reaches 1.0.
> Flask really is widely used though. There's already a lot of pressure to not
> make any breaking changes. Additionally, Armin is really good about this, so
> I think versioning semantics aside, you'll be just fine.
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:48 PM, pronoyc@gmail.com <pronoyc@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Okay, let's end this by telling you. It is incredibly stable. It's been
>> used in production by me and many other people. The extensions and the whole
>> framework itself is very well built and with every new release it becomes
>> better.
>>
>> Hope this satisfied you.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> It is not my intention to offend you. As I have expressed in a
>>> previous mail it is not very clear.
>>> For example in the The Python Package Index (PyPI) it clearly says the
>>> project is in Beta status.
>>>
>>> All I wanted to know is if the project is stable or not.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Edd Robinson <me@eddrobinson.net> wrote:
>>> > According to your website, you're "web development experts", so you can
>>> > work that out for yourself, right?
>>> >
>>> > Nice trolling.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 20 Nov 2012, at 18:03, Serge G. Spaolonzi wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Hi,
>>> >>
>>> >> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the
>>> >> Documentation that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about
>>> >> many people using the framework for production.
>>> >> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version
>>> >> and if it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production
>>> >> websites using it.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>>> >> Cobalys Systems
>>> >> http://www.cobalys.com
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>>> Cobalys Systems
>>> http://www.cobalys.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Pronoy Chopra
>> http://blog.pronoy.in/
>> http://www.twitter.com/pronoyc
>>
>



-- 
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Cobalys Systems
http://www.cobalys.com

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Mark Grey
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 19:50
Gonna go ahead an chime in here...

I think Joe's comments sum up the intentions of the core flask devs in
including the caveat that Flask be considering pre-major-release.  There is
very little intention of changing the core api on routing and most common
conventions, especially since a lot of the functionality of theses systems
is highly dependent on the Werkzeug layer below it, which is as bare bones
as it comes.

Armin and crew have a pretty consistent commitment to not breaking any of
the API conventions in the higher-level framework logic.  Most
application-domain code need not fear futureproofing issues, especially
since any, if not all, changes that would happen to the core API are way
lower down that the common stuff you touch building the typical app (the
session global, the request/response context, the methods by which you
define your routes.)  Even if there are more notable changes to be made in
the way we do something, they are more commonly expressed in community
extension than in modifications to Flask proper.

As for "arrogance" I think there may be a slight language barrier at play
here, just from looking at the wording of your original email.  There is a
tendancy for messages of these kind, when worded in a quick/terse manor, to
come of as accusatory.  I can't help but notice that your company is
from Uruguay, and so the connotations of the word "wonder" in an email of
this subject might not be immediately apparent.  I would look at this as a
misunderstanding between parties.  I know I for one can get pretty excited
defending my choice of flask over larger, more feature-rich (or in my
parlance, "bloated") frameworks.  I don't think anybody was intending to
flame one another.

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>wrote:

> Thanks. I already know Jinja2 and it is the reason I started to think
> about using Flask in the first place.
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Joe Esposito <espo58@gmail.com> wrote:
> > However, "stability" has two meanings.
> >
> > There's the "opposite of buggy" in which case, yes, Flask is very stable.
> > Simply because the grunt work is in the two highly-reliable dependencies:
> > Jinja2 and Werkzeug.
> >
> > But then there's also "dependency stability," meaning Flask's API won't
> > change. I think having flask still be in "beta" reserves the right to
> make
> > breaking changes when it reaches 1.0.
> > Flask really is widely used though. There's already a lot of pressure to
> not
> > make any breaking changes. Additionally, Armin is really good about
> this, so
> > I think versioning semantics aside, you'll be just fine.
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:48 PM, pronoyc@gmail.com <pronoyc@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Okay, let's end this by telling you. It is incredibly stable. It's been
> >> used in production by me and many other people. The extensions and the
> whole
> >> framework itself is very well built and with every new release it
> becomes
> >> better.
> >>
> >> Hope this satisfied you.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> It is not my intention to offend you. As I have expressed in a
> >>> previous mail it is not very clear.
> >>> For example in the The Python Package Index (PyPI) it clearly says the
> >>> project is in Beta status.
> >>>
> >>> All I wanted to know is if the project is stable or not.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Edd Robinson <me@eddrobinson.net>
> wrote:
> >>> > According to your website, you're "web development experts", so you
> can
> >>> > work that out for yourself, right?
> >>> >
> >>> > Nice trolling.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On 20 Nov 2012, at 18:03, Serge G. Spaolonzi wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Hi,
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the
> >>> >> Documentation that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read
> about
> >>> >> many people using the framework for production.
> >>> >> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version
> >>> >> and if it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of
> production
> >>> >> websites using it.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thanks
> >>> >>
> >>> >> --
> >>> >> Serge G. Spaolonzi
> >>> >> Cobalys Systems
> >>> >> http://www.cobalys.com
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Serge G. Spaolonzi
> >>> Cobalys Systems
> >>> http://www.cobalys.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Pronoy Chopra
> >> http://blog.pronoy.in/
> >> http://www.twitter.com/pronoyc
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Serge G. Spaolonzi
> Cobalys Systems
> http://www.cobalys.com
>

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
David | StyleFlare
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 20:08
I will apologize as well; I was not trying to be insulting, but I do 
think that software is software and unless it says in big bold letters 
that it is "not being maintained" or "Not for Production Use" then you 
can assume its usable and hope it can do what you need to do with it.

Since software is constantly evolving, you would most probably choose 
some framework that suits your most current needs and make some 
prototype app to see how well it works in your environment.


Other than that its just some code, its open and you can use it.

Usually we like to choose software based on how well it suits our goals, 
not whether others are using it, while that can be a metric of sorts, 
its probably better to just test it and decide for yourself.

Clearly you would want to choose something that has some sort of 
community support which Flask has and is constantly growing.

I hope that helps.




On 11/20/12 2:50 PM, Mark Grey wrote:
> Gonna go ahead an chime in here...
>
> I think Joe's comments sum up the intentions of the core flask devs in 
> including the caveat that Flask be considering pre-major-release. 
>  There is very little intention of changing the core api on routing 
> and most common conventions, especially since a lot of the 
> functionality of theses systems is highly dependent on the Werkzeug 
> layer below it, which is as bare bones as it comes.
>
> Armin and crew have a pretty consistent commitment to not breaking any 
> of the API conventions in the higher-level framework logic.  Most 
> application-domain code need not fear futureproofing issues, 
> especially since any, if not all, changes that would happen to the 
> core API are way lower down that the common stuff you touch building 
> the typical app (the session global, the request/response context, the 
> methods by which you define your routes.)  Even if there are more 
> notable changes to be made in the way we do something, they are more 
> commonly expressed in community extension than in modifications to 
> Flask proper.
>
> As for "arrogance" I think there may be a slight language barrier at 
> play here, just from looking at the wording of your original email. 
>  There is a tendancy for messages of these kind, when worded in a 
> quick/terse manor, to come of as accusatory.  I can't help but notice 
> that your company is from Uruguay, and so the connotations of the word 
> "wonder" in an email of this subject might not be immediately 
> apparent.  I would look at this as a misunderstanding between parties. 
>  I know I for one can get pretty excited defending my choice of flask 
> over larger, more feature-rich (or in my parlance, "bloated") 
> frameworks.  I don't think anybody was intending to flame one another.
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com 
> <mailto:serge@cobalys.com>> wrote:
>
>     Thanks. I already know Jinja2 and it is the reason I started to think
>     about using Flask in the first place.
>
>     On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Joe Esposito <espo58@gmail.com
>     <mailto:espo58@gmail.com>> wrote:
>     > However, "stability" has two meanings.
>     >
>     > There's the "opposite of buggy" in which case, yes, Flask is
>     very stable.
>     > Simply because the grunt work is in the two highly-reliable
>     dependencies:
>     > Jinja2 and Werkzeug.
>     >
>     > But then there's also "dependency stability," meaning Flask's
>     API won't
>     > change. I think having flask still be in "beta" reserves the
>     right to make
>     > breaking changes when it reaches 1.0.
>     > Flask really is widely used though. There's already a lot of
>     pressure to not
>     > make any breaking changes. Additionally, Armin is really good
>     about this, so
>     > I think versioning semantics aside, you'll be just fine.
>     >
>     > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:48 PM, pronoyc@gmail.com
>     <mailto:pronoyc@gmail.com> <pronoyc@gmail.com
>     <mailto:pronoyc@gmail.com>>
>     > wrote:
>     >>
>     >> Okay, let's end this by telling you. It is incredibly stable.
>     It's been
>     >> used in production by me and many other people. The extensions
>     and the whole
>     >> framework itself is very well built and with every new release
>     it becomes
>     >> better.
>     >>
>     >> Hope this satisfied you.
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Serge G. Spaolonzi
>     <serge@cobalys.com <mailto:serge@cobalys.com>>
>     >> wrote:
>     >>>
>     >>> It is not my intention to offend you. As I have expressed in a
>     >>> previous mail it is not very clear.
>     >>> For example in the The Python Package Index (PyPI) it clearly
>     says the
>     >>> project is in Beta status.
>     >>>
>     >>> All I wanted to know is if the project is stable or not.
>     >>>
>     >>> Thanks
>     >>>
>     >>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Edd Robinson
>     <me@eddrobinson.net <mailto:me@eddrobinson.net>> wrote:
>     >>> > According to your website, you're "web development experts",
>     so you can
>     >>> > work that out for yourself, right?
>     >>> >
>     >>> > Nice trolling.
>     >>> >
>     >>> >
>     >>> > On 20 Nov 2012, at 18:03, Serge G. Spaolonzi wrote:
>     >>> >
>     >>> >> Hi,
>     >>> >>
>     >>> >> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the
>     >>> >> Documentation that the current version is 0.9 but also I
>     have read about
>     >>> >> many people using the framework for production.
>     >>> >> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current
>     version
>     >>> >> and if it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples
>     of production
>     >>> >> websites using it.
>     >>> >>
>     >>> >>
>     >>> >> Thanks
>     >>> >>
>     >>> >> --
>     >>> >> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>     >>> >> Cobalys Systems
>     >>> >> http://www.cobalys.com
>     >>> >>
>     >>> >
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>> --
>     >>> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>     >>> Cobalys Systems
>     >>> http://www.cobalys.com
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> --
>     >> Regards,
>     >>
>     >> Pronoy Chopra
>     >> http://blog.pronoy.in/
>     >> http://www.twitter.com/pronoyc
>     >>
>     >
>
>
>
>     --
>     Serge G. Spaolonzi
>     Cobalys Systems
>     http://www.cobalys.com
>
>

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Mark Grey
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 19:55
As for limitations, generally Flask is going to provide you with all the
HTTP front-facing interfacing for your app, and leave the bigger decisions
up to you.

There is no built in, web-gui admin like in Django.  There is no enforced
database system.  You could use bare DB drivers if you so chose, or select
the ORM of your choice.

Flask, and Pocoo projects in general I have noticed, tend to prefer mild
suggestion over hard and fast rule.

Flask does have a simple testing server that can be run locally, but it
lacks a lot of the complicated bootstrapping/auto-modelling that a lot of
devs seem to have a love-it-or-hate-it relationship with in Django.

If you are building an API from the ground up and desire a tabula rasa that
will let you make all the decisions, Flask is the tool to use.

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Mark Grey <mark.asperia@gmail.com> wrote:

> Gonna go ahead an chime in here...
>
> I think Joe's comments sum up the intentions of the core flask devs in
> including the caveat that Flask be considering pre-major-release.  There is
> very little intention of changing the core api on routing and most common
> conventions, especially since a lot of the functionality of theses systems
> is highly dependent on the Werkzeug layer below it, which is as bare bones
> as it comes.
>
> Armin and crew have a pretty consistent commitment to not breaking any of
> the API conventions in the higher-level framework logic.  Most
> application-domain code need not fear futureproofing issues, especially
> since any, if not all, changes that would happen to the core API are way
> lower down that the common stuff you touch building the typical app (the
> session global, the request/response context, the methods by which you
> define your routes.)  Even if there are more notable changes to be made in
> the way we do something, they are more commonly expressed in community
> extension than in modifications to Flask proper.
>
> As for "arrogance" I think there may be a slight language barrier at play
> here, just from looking at the wording of your original email.  There is a
> tendancy for messages of these kind, when worded in a quick/terse manor, to
> come of as accusatory.  I can't help but notice that your company is
> from Uruguay, and so the connotations of the word "wonder" in an email of
> this subject might not be immediately apparent.  I would look at this as a
> misunderstanding between parties.  I know I for one can get pretty excited
> defending my choice of flask over larger, more feature-rich (or in my
> parlance, "bloated") frameworks.  I don't think anybody was intending to
> flame one another.
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>wrote:
>
>> Thanks. I already know Jinja2 and it is the reason I started to think
>> about using Flask in the first place.
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Joe Esposito <espo58@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > However, "stability" has two meanings.
>> >
>> > There's the "opposite of buggy" in which case, yes, Flask is very
>> stable.
>> > Simply because the grunt work is in the two highly-reliable
>> dependencies:
>> > Jinja2 and Werkzeug.
>> >
>> > But then there's also "dependency stability," meaning Flask's API won't
>> > change. I think having flask still be in "beta" reserves the right to
>> make
>> > breaking changes when it reaches 1.0.
>> > Flask really is widely used though. There's already a lot of pressure
>> to not
>> > make any breaking changes. Additionally, Armin is really good about
>> this, so
>> > I think versioning semantics aside, you'll be just fine.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:48 PM, pronoyc@gmail.com <pronoyc@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Okay, let's end this by telling you. It is incredibly stable. It's been
>> >> used in production by me and many other people. The extensions and the
>> whole
>> >> framework itself is very well built and with every new release it
>> becomes
>> >> better.
>> >>
>> >> Hope this satisfied you.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <
>> serge@cobalys.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> It is not my intention to offend you. As I have expressed in a
>> >>> previous mail it is not very clear.
>> >>> For example in the The Python Package Index (PyPI) it clearly says the
>> >>> project is in Beta status.
>> >>>
>> >>> All I wanted to know is if the project is stable or not.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Edd Robinson <me@eddrobinson.net>
>> wrote:
>> >>> > According to your website, you're "web development experts", so you
>> can
>> >>> > work that out for yourself, right?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Nice trolling.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On 20 Nov 2012, at 18:03, Serge G. Spaolonzi wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> Hi,
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the
>> >>> >> Documentation that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read
>> about
>> >>> >> many people using the framework for production.
>> >>> >> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version
>> >>> >> and if it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of
>> production
>> >>> >> websites using it.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Thanks
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> --
>> >>> >> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>> >>> >> Cobalys Systems
>> >>> >> http://www.cobalys.com
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>> >>> Cobalys Systems
>> >>> http://www.cobalys.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Regards,
>> >>
>> >> Pronoy Chopra
>> >> http://blog.pronoy.in/
>> >> http://www.twitter.com/pronoyc
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>> Cobalys Systems
>> http://www.cobalys.com
>>
>
>

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 20:25
> As for "arrogance" I think there may be a slight language barrier at play
> here, just from looking at the wording of your original email.  There is a
> tendancy for messages of these kind, when worded in a quick/terse manor, to
> come of as accusatory.  I can't help but notice that your company is from
> Uruguay, and so the connotations of the word "wonder" in an email of this
> subject might not be immediately apparent.  I would look at this as a
> misunderstanding between parties.  I know I for one can get pretty excited
> defending my choice of flask over larger, more feature-rich (or in my
> parlance, "bloated") frameworks.  I don't think anybody was intending to
> flame one another.

My bad, I didnt pay attention to the wording of the original mail,
English is not my native language.


On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Mark Grey <mark.asperia@gmail.com> wrote:
> As for limitations, generally Flask is going to provide you with all the
> HTTP front-facing interfacing for your app, and leave the bigger decisions
> up to you.
>
> There is no built in, web-gui admin like in Django.  There is no enforced
> database system.  You could use bare DB drivers if you so chose, or select
> the ORM of your choice.

That is exactly what I am looking for, a framework with loosely
coupled components.

Thanks

-- 
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Cobalys Systems
http://www.cobalys.com

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Mark Grey
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 20:31
>That is exactly what I am looking for, a framework with loosely
> coupled components.

That's the main reason I ended up settling with Flask over Django.  I found
more often than not I could actually get work done quicker modeling things
myself with simpler ORM solutions, especially after MongoDB replaced MySQL
in the stack for most of my smaller apps.  Since Django really tries to
appeal to the widest base, and hedges itself on rapid deployment, in felt
like I was including a lot of tools I could make no use of, since I
typically just wrote console commands using python's Cmd module to mange my
application specific entities.

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>wrote:

> > As for "arrogance" I think there may be a slight language barrier at play
> > here, just from looking at the wording of your original email.  There is
> a
> > tendancy for messages of these kind, when worded in a quick/terse manor,
> to
> > come of as accusatory.  I can't help but notice that your company is from
> > Uruguay, and so the connotations of the word "wonder" in an email of this
> > subject might not be immediately apparent.  I would look at this as a
> > misunderstanding between parties.  I know I for one can get pretty
> excited
> > defending my choice of flask over larger, more feature-rich (or in my
> > parlance, "bloated") frameworks.  I don't think anybody was intending to
> > flame one another.
>
> My bad, I didnt pay attention to the wording of the original mail,
> English is not my native language.
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Mark Grey <mark.asperia@gmail.com> wrote:
> > As for limitations, generally Flask is going to provide you with all the
> > HTTP front-facing interfacing for your app, and leave the bigger
> decisions
> > up to you.
> >
> > There is no built in, web-gui admin like in Django.  There is no enforced
> > database system.  You could use bare DB drivers if you so chose, or
> select
> > the ORM of your choice.
>
> That is exactly what I am looking for, a framework with loosely
> coupled components.
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> Serge G. Spaolonzi
> Cobalys Systems
> http://www.cobalys.com
>

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 20:53
Thanks for all the replies.

-- 
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Cobalys Systems
http://www.cobalys.com

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Freedom Dumlao
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 20:50
I agree.

Django is a great framework, and takes the "kitchen sink" approach to
including features in the framework. This makes Django exceptionally good
for the class of applications that it was originally designed to suit. As
time goes on though and you leave Django's golden path to solve problems
you end up replacing much of Django's functionality with your own code or
just not using entire pieces of it at all.

Flask is really the opposite of that approach. It includes just slightly
more than you would need to get an application running, and allows you to
choose extensions to add any additional features you need as you go. It's
also extremely extensible which makes it easy to add features you need when
extensions don't cut it.

I prefer the simpler approach of Flask myself and it's rapidly becoming one
of the more popular web application frameworks which means other people are
coming to the same conclusion that most of us on this list have.

- Freedom

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Mark Grey <mark.asperia@gmail.com> wrote:

> >That is exactly what I am looking for, a framework with loosely
> > coupled components.
>
> That's the main reason I ended up settling with Flask over Django.  I
> found more often than not I could actually get work done quicker modeling
> things myself with simpler ORM solutions, especially after MongoDB replaced
> MySQL in the stack for most of my smaller apps.  Since Django really tries
> to appeal to the widest base, and hedges itself on rapid deployment, in
> felt like I was including a lot of tools I could make no use of, since I
> typically just wrote console commands using python's Cmd module to mange my
> application specific entities.
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>wrote:
>
>> > As for "arrogance" I think there may be a slight language barrier at
>> play
>> > here, just from looking at the wording of your original email.  There
>> is a
>> > tendancy for messages of these kind, when worded in a quick/terse
>> manor, to
>> > come of as accusatory.  I can't help but notice that your company is
>> from
>> > Uruguay, and so the connotations of the word "wonder" in an email of
>> this
>> > subject might not be immediately apparent.  I would look at this as a
>> > misunderstanding between parties.  I know I for one can get pretty
>> excited
>> > defending my choice of flask over larger, more feature-rich (or in my
>> > parlance, "bloated") frameworks.  I don't think anybody was intending to
>> > flame one another.
>>
>> My bad, I didnt pay attention to the wording of the original mail,
>> English is not my native language.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Mark Grey <mark.asperia@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > As for limitations, generally Flask is going to provide you with all the
>> > HTTP front-facing interfacing for your app, and leave the bigger
>> decisions
>> > up to you.
>> >
>> > There is no built in, web-gui admin like in Django.  There is no
>> enforced
>> > database system.  You could use bare DB drivers if you so chose, or
>> select
>> > the ORM of your choice.
>>
>> That is exactly what I am looking for, a framework with loosely
>> coupled components.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> --
>> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>> Cobalys Systems
>> http://www.cobalys.com
>>
>
>

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 19:30
Ok, I understand It wont make any difference if some one tells how good it is.
But for me I would have made a big difference if some one tells me the
opposite, i.e.: the restrictions and the weak points.
Restrictions are easier to test because they are more specific.

About the reaction of some members in here, I don't take but I wonder
what is the propose of the arrogance, I guess feeding the ego is good
for some people but lets face it it wont attract more users or make
any actual progress in any sense of the life.
Indeed it gives a terrible image.

My question is valid, it is clearly expressed in the Python package
index the project is in beta status. I know versioning is a subjective
notation and I was wondering the meaning of that. For the stakeholders
and people related to projects with no knowledge of Computer Science
the word 'beta' is scary and it may affect their decisions.



On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:48 PM, pronoyc@gmail.com <pronoyc@gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay, let's end this by telling you. It is incredibly stable. It's been used
> in production by me and many other people. The extensions and the whole
> framework itself is very well built and with every new release it becomes
> better.
>
> Hope this satisfied you.
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> It is not my intention to offend you. As I have expressed in a
>> previous mail it is not very clear.
>> For example in the The Python Package Index (PyPI) it clearly says the
>> project is in Beta status.
>>
>> All I wanted to know is if the project is stable or not.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Edd Robinson <me@eddrobinson.net> wrote:
>> > According to your website, you're "web development experts", so you can
>> > work that out for yourself, right?
>> >
>> > Nice trolling.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 20 Nov 2012, at 18:03, Serge G. Spaolonzi wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the
>> >> Documentation that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about
>> >> many people using the framework for production.
>> >> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version and
>> >> if it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production
>> >> websites using it.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>> >> Cobalys Systems
>> >> http://www.cobalys.com
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>> Cobalys Systems
>> http://www.cobalys.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Pronoy Chopra
> http://blog.pronoy.in/
> http://www.twitter.com/pronoyc
>



-- 
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Cobalys Systems
http://www.cobalys.com

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Todd Kennedy
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 19:38
I think the issue people are taking with it is that a ton of software you 
use every day is "beta" but that shouldn't stop you.

When I look at software I want to use my questions aren't around the 
release state of it but rather:

1. is it actively maintained
2. is there a community of users
3. are there examples in the real world of people using this software
4. does it accomplish what i want it to accomplish
5. (this one is new) are people asking questions and getting them answered
on stack overflow

What I will frequently do then is create a proof of concept with that 
piece of software to see how usable it really is. If I like it and it 
doesn't do exactly what I want, well, that's the beauty of open source.  
Make changes and submit them back upstream. Make a fork. etc etc etc

I did this with Flask (over a year ago actually) and then a few weeks 
later with Backbone.js.  Both of them are indispensable tools in my 
toolkit at this point regardless of the fact that they are both not yet at
a "1.0" status and still in beta.

I mean look how long Gmail was in beta for but people were using it for 
mission critical stuff? 

Labels are just arbitrary classifications, what really matters is does the
tool fit your needs and suite your programming style.  If so, great!

On Nov 20, 2012, at 2:30 PM, Serge G. Spaolonzi wrote:

> Ok, I understand It wont make any difference if some one tells how good it is.
> But for me I would have made a big difference if some one tells me the
> opposite, i.e.: the restrictions and the weak points.
> Restrictions are easier to test because they are more specific.
> 
> About the reaction of some members in here, I don't take but I wonder
> what is the propose of the arrogance, I guess feeding the ego is good
> for some people but lets face it it wont attract more users or make
> any actual progress in any sense of the life.
> Indeed it gives a terrible image.
> 
> My question is valid, it is clearly expressed in the Python package
> index the project is in beta status. I know versioning is a subjective
> notation and I was wondering the meaning of that. For the stakeholders
> and people related to projects with no knowledge of Computer Science
> the word 'beta' is scary and it may affect their decisions.
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:48 PM, pronoyc@gmail.com <pronoyc@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Okay, let's end this by telling you. It is incredibly stable. It's been used
>> in production by me and many other people. The extensions and the whole
>> framework itself is very well built and with every new release it becomes
>> better.
>> 
>> Hope this satisfied you.
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> It is not my intention to offend you. As I have expressed in a
>>> previous mail it is not very clear.
>>> For example in the The Python Package Index (PyPI) it clearly says the
>>> project is in Beta status.
>>> 
>>> All I wanted to know is if the project is stable or not.
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Edd Robinson <me@eddrobinson.net> wrote:
>>>> According to your website, you're "web development experts", so you can
>>>> work that out for yourself, right?
>>>> 
>>>> Nice trolling.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 20 Nov 2012, at 18:03, Serge G. Spaolonzi wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the
>>>>> Documentation that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about
>>>>> many people using the framework for production.
>>>>> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version and
>>>>> if it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production
>>>>> websites using it.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>>>>> Cobalys Systems
>>>>> http://www.cobalys.com
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>>> Cobalys Systems
>>> http://www.cobalys.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Pronoy Chopra
>> http://blog.pronoy.in/
>> http://www.twitter.com/pronoyc
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Serge G. Spaolonzi
> Cobalys Systems
> http://www.cobalys.com

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 20:12
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Todd Kennedy <todd.kennedy@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the issue people are taking with it is that a ton of software 
you use every day is "beta" but that shouldn't stop you.
>
> When I look at software I want to use my questions aren't around the 
release state of it but rather:
>
> 1. is it actively maintained
> 2. is there a community of users
> 3. are there examples in the real world of people using this software
> 4. does it accomplish what i want it to accomplish
> 5. (this one is new) are people asking questions and getting them 
answered on stack overflow
>
> What I will frequently do then is create a proof of concept with that 
piece of software to see how usable it really is. If I like it and it 
doesn't do exactly what I want, well, that's the beauty of open source.  
Make changes and submit them back upstream. Make a fork. etc etc etc
>
> I did this with Flask (over a year ago actually) and then a few weeks 
later with Backbone.js.  Both of them are indispensable tools in my 
toolkit at this point regardless of the fact that they are both not yet at
a "1.0" status and still in beta.
>
> I mean look how long Gmail was in beta for but people were using it for 
mission critical stuff?
>
> Labels are just arbitrary classifications, what really matters is does 
the tool fit your needs and suite your programming style.  If so, great!
>

Good points, I have checked some of those points before addressing
myself to the list, I even checked the made for Flask plugins and the
some of the websites made in Flask.
The word beta, made me think twice. You are right it is just a label.

Thanks

-- 
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Cobalys Systems
http://www.cobalys.com

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Paulo Sampaio
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 19:57
Hi serge,

As a microframework the reliability will depend on all the pieces you'll
put together, flask has some good plugins wich can make a great package of
python applications to serve your system.

In my opinion, flask e is so small that it has very little restrictions,
and you can go around with some coding or using another python app.

I've seen some big systems make use of flask without problems.

About the trolls, well, let them be, they are everywhere nowadays.

Atenciosamente,
__
*Paulo Sampaio*


2012/11/20 Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>

> Ok, I understand It wont make any difference if some one tells how good it
> is.
> But for me I would have made a big difference if some one tells me the
> opposite, i.e.: the restrictions and the weak points.
> Restrictions are easier to test because they are more specific.
>
> About the reaction of some members in here, I don't take but I wonder
> what is the propose of the arrogance, I guess feeding the ego is good
> for some people but lets face it it wont attract more users or make
> any actual progress in any sense of the life.
> Indeed it gives a terrible image.
>
> My question is valid, it is clearly expressed in the Python package
> index the project is in beta status. I know versioning is a subjective
> notation and I was wondering the meaning of that. For the stakeholders
> and people related to projects with no knowledge of Computer Science
> the word 'beta' is scary and it may affect their decisions.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:48 PM, pronoyc@gmail.com <pronoyc@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Okay, let's end this by telling you. It is incredibly stable. It's been
> used
> > in production by me and many other people. The extensions and the whole
> > framework itself is very well built and with every new release it becomes
> > better.
> >
> > Hope this satisfied you.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> It is not my intention to offend you. As I have expressed in a
> >> previous mail it is not very clear.
> >> For example in the The Python Package Index (PyPI) it clearly says the
> >> project is in Beta status.
> >>
> >> All I wanted to know is if the project is stable or not.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Edd Robinson <me@eddrobinson.net>
> wrote:
> >> > According to your website, you're "web development experts", so you
> can
> >> > work that out for yourself, right?
> >> >
> >> > Nice trolling.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 20 Nov 2012, at 18:03, Serge G. Spaolonzi wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >>
> >> >> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the
> >> >> Documentation that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read
> about
> >> >> many people using the framework for production.
> >> >> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version
> and
> >> >> if it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production
> >> >> websites using it.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Serge G. Spaolonzi
> >> >> Cobalys Systems
> >> >> http://www.cobalys.com
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Serge G. Spaolonzi
> >> Cobalys Systems
> >> http://www.cobalys.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> >
> > Pronoy Chopra
> > http://blog.pronoy.in/
> > http://www.twitter.com/pronoyc
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Serge G. Spaolonzi
> Cobalys Systems
> http://www.cobalys.com
>

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Freedom Dumlao
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 18:14
Not only is it production ready, it's used widely in production on many
large scale web applications (one of which I am the Software Architect
for). The version number in Flask does not reflect the stability or
suitability of the codebase, and instead should be considered an indicator
that the API is still forming and future versions may have a slightly
different API.

I've been using Flask in production since version 0.7 and have loved the
stability, the simplicity, and most of all the community.

Just my 2 Cents,

- Freedom


On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the Documentation
> that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about many people
> using the framework for production.
> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version and if
> it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production websites
> using it.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> Serge G. Spaolonzi
> Cobalys Systems
> http://www.cobalys.com
>
>

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 18:27
Thanks.

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Freedom Dumlao <freedomdumlao@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not only is it production ready, it's used widely in production on many
> large scale web applications (one of which I am the Software Architect for).
> The version number in Flask does not reflect the stability or suitability of
> the codebase, and instead should be considered an indicator that the API is
> still forming and future versions may have a slightly different API.
>
> I've been using Flask in production since version 0.7 and have loved the
> stability, the simplicity, and most of all the community.
>
> Just my 2 Cents,
>
> - Freedom
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the Documentation
>> that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about many people using
>> the framework for production.
>> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version and if
>> it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production websites
>> using it.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> --
>> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>> Cobalys Systems
>> http://www.cobalys.com
>>
>



-- 
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Cobalys Systems
http://www.cobalys.com

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
pronoyc@gmail.com
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 18:20
I wonder if there is anyone who's made a website like builtwithflask.com


On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:44 PM, Freedom Dumlao <freedomdumlao@gmail.com>wrote:

> Not only is it production ready, it's used widely in production on many
> large scale web applications (one of which I am the Software Architect
> for). The version number in Flask does not reflect the stability or
> suitability of the codebase, and instead should be considered an indicator
> that the API is still forming and future versions may have a slightly
> different API.
>
> I've been using Flask in production since version 0.7 and have loved the
> stability, the simplicity, and most of all the community.
>
> Just my 2 Cents,
>
> - Freedom
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Serge G. Spaolonzi <serge@cobalys.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the
>> Documentation that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about
>> many people using the framework for production.
>> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version and
>> if it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production
>> websites using it.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> --
>> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>> Cobalys Systems
>> http://www.cobalys.com
>>
>>
>


-- 
Regards,

Pronoy Chopra
http://blog.pronoy.in <http://www.pronoy.in/about>/
http://www.twitter.com/pronoyc

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
David J
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 18:10
I hope your kidding.
On Nov 20, 2012 1:08 PM, "Serge G. Spaolonzi" <serge@cobalys.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the Documentation
> that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about many people
> using the framework for production.
> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version and if
> it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production websites
> using it.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> Serge G. Spaolonzi
> Cobalys Systems
> http://www.cobalys.com
>
>

Re: [flask] Is Flask Production ready?

From:
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Date:
2012-11-20 @ 18:22
No, I am not.

Sorry about the question, I have searched all around and I can figured
it out. I have tryed the application myself but I know there is big
difference between trying it i use it in production ready
environments.

I am confused because the documentations says: it is not 1.0 but
widely used. How should I take that?

> It's still not 1.0 but it's shaping up nicely and is
> already widely used. Consider the API to slightly
> improve over time but we don't plan on breaking it.


Sorry again about this question and thank you.


On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:10 PM, David J <david@styleflare.com> wrote:
>
> I hope your kidding.
>
> On Nov 20, 2012 1:08 PM, "Serge G. Spaolonzi" <serge@cobalys.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I wonder if Flask is production ready. I have noticed in the 
Documentation that the current version is 0.9 but also I have read about 
many people using the framework for production.
>> I would like to know what are the constrains of the current version and
if it is "buggy" or stable. I would appreciate examples of production 
websites using it.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> --
>> Serge G. Spaolonzi
>> Cobalys Systems
>> http://www.cobalys.com
>>



--
Serge G. Spaolonzi
Cobalys Systems
http://www.cobalys.com