Talk:Grok (web framework)

Impartial?
Marked as not-impartial enough? Ah, a big improvement would probably to list the capabilities and characteristics without making a value statement about other web frameworks. So no "grok is better than django because of the component architecture".

Reinout (talk) 15:09, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Fixed. I think some code examples would be nice to explain the difference and would make it seem less advertisy. --OpenFuture (talk) 16:44, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I think the original text is actually not as bad as it seems, it can just be easily misread: "This way Grok is a step forward to popular Python web frameworks like TurboGears, Pylons and Django" is *intended* to read, in my understanding, as saying Grok is trying to move in the direction of these frameworks, not that it's a step *beyond* these frameworks. It can however be far too easily misread. I've tried to put at least the references to other web frameworks back in the article as I think it's useful to the reader in mental categorization and in understanding Grok's aims, but feel free to improve. Martijn Faassen (talk) 19:13, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Grok (web framework). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080824224921/http://grok.zope.org/about/why-grok to http://grok.zope.org/about/why-grok

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:58, 25 March 2017 (UTC)