Mike Orr wrote:

> I was attracted to Quixote because of its minimalist approach, much
> smaller than other web application servers, yet every "essential" I
> needed was there:

> But as time goes on I find more essentials I wish Quixote had (things
> that David doesn't necessarily agree are essential :).  In my mind,
> Quixote or Quixote+batteries should come with everything one needs to
> build a straightforward professional app.

What is essential and what is not will vary from person to person. The
real question (not for me to answer) is what does Quixtoe want to be? A
Zope replacement, an effective object publishing library, or somewhere
in between? Personally, as long as any new 'essentials' added are as
decoupled from the rest as PTL, I wouldn't mind. I may use the new stuff
when I like it, or continue using QLime.

>> Concerning the idea of the quixote-extras project: I like the idea, but
>> we need to guarantee an overall consistency of the batteries. I mean,
>> not every contribution can go into it, the core Quixote developers
>> must coordinate the efforts. This mean they would have a lot of time
>> to spend just in discussions with the contributors: are they willing to
>> spend all that time?
>
> Webware has a separate SourceForge project, the Webware Sandbox, where
> any developer can create his/her own directory and upload projects,
> whether finished or unfinished.  The more useful code gets advertised by
> word of mouth, and when it's ready it can be pulled into an official
> "batteries" package.
> http://webware-sandbox.sourceforge.net/

This sounds like a great way to do quixote-extras, if that is where we
are headed.

Cheers,
Shalabh