kubuntuboy (October 8, 2008 at 8:40 am)

It's easier for google, to take control of your site if they need ;)

CamiloSanchez1979 (October 3, 2008 at 4:53 am)

What's the difference between doing this on Google's engine and on my own with php?

vpoqqk (September 25, 2008 at 11:30 am)

Good~!

aonutube (September 24, 2008 at 8:02 am)

thanks

phrikety (September 15, 2008 at 5:53 pm)

i was beween learning python and ruby and when for ruby because of the rich MVC frameworks that unlike this are OPEN-SOURCE --rails, merb etc. I've come to really like ruby, although i have many gripes about rails--havnt tried merb cause it doesnt have much documentation. i think the pure OO in ruby is awesome and it doesnt try to assert any formatting onto to, you can do it completely is old java/c++ type syntax if you want

part2themovie (September 10, 2008 at 3:06 am)

I liked google when it was the under dog, now they're trying to create a framework for everything including matter, and now I'm the under dog :(

shoseki (August 31, 2008 at 10:10 pm)

c) More complex View options (not based on hand coding the template just to access data)Things that I liked about it : it seemed straight forward to understand the MVC structure, although I would be curious how it could interact with other languages, other databases and other templates languages. Using standard technologies would be a big bonus.

shoseki (August 31, 2008 at 10:10 pm)

I have mixed feelings towards this. Whilst the demo was extremely quick to show, it certainly lacked complexity. I would like to see a demo which had :a) A more complex structured object and associated databases (that looked like all SQL had to be hand coded, ouch)b) More complex business logic (where would all the business logic be defined? Where can default actions be defined for administrative functions? How can Individual user actions etc be defined?)

TerriToniAX (August 28, 2008 at 2:21 pm)

Yep, I saw it too.

minitah (August 17, 2008 at 7:54 pm)

i agree.