Michele Simionato wrote:
> Seriously, I was attracted by Quixote minimalism, so I agree with the
> small core concept. OTOH, as Mike says, nearly all real Web applications
> require persistence, user management, etc. so it would have sense
> to have a standard default library providing that. It was fun and
> instructive for me to implement a permission mechanism in Quixote.
> Nevertheless, I think there should be an "official" permission mechanism.
> Of course, in order to be useful the mechanism must be very simple,
> so we can build on it ;) But at least we would have a set of common names
> to override, a suggested way of doing things in a "Quixotesque" way, etc.

I think it gets harder as you move to other pieces. For example, I'd say
(and believe most of us would agree) that there is no simpler, better
way to do object publishing. However I expect much greater disagreements
as to what a simple, minimal, Pythonic persistence or permission
mechanism might be. I'd be happy to be proved wrong. Also, having a
permission system might lead to a stricter definition of what a Quixote
application is, stripping us of some of the our current freedom in
designing applications.

Cheers,
Shalabh