[reactordev]

I was going to say this. To eschew types means a bunch of attrs boilerplate to include it if you aren’t doing pydantic. sqlalchemy is just better suited for getting the job done using a pretty standard interface from other orms.

The multi “app” structure is confusing as hell to someone who is writing an… app. It reminds me of JBOSS from Java and no one likes JBOSS app servers anymore.

[stuaxo]

The multi app structure is really good and enables extending your project with other apps and gaining all their migrations and everything else.

Its one thing I didnt appreciate until I tried fastapi and found it wasn't there.

[reactordev]

Agree to disagree.

I’d rather utilize requirements.txt or pyproject.toml to include a library than add an app to my app.

No. I refuse to operate like Wordpress. Glad it’s fine for you but it doesn’t with me for a variety of reasons. The biggest being is now you have multiple apps running in your app so who is to blame when it fails? You? The inner app provider? Django? Accounting? When utilizing libraries, we can utilize testing that can test our code against them either directly or using mocks. Separating ourselves from our dependencies, in case our dependencies change. Django’s model would have you add apps on apps with model definitions spread all over the code base making it near impossible to tell what your schema is…

The JBOSS App Server model is so dead. If I had it my way, Django would be deprecated in favor of FastAPI, Pydantic, and SQLAlchemy.