summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/docs/tutorials
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'docs/tutorials')
-rw-r--r--docs/tutorials/cmf/index.rst13
1 files changed, 6 insertions, 7 deletions
diff --git a/docs/tutorials/cmf/index.rst b/docs/tutorials/cmf/index.rst
index 94c73af8e..26aa336a9 100644
--- a/docs/tutorials/cmf/index.rst
+++ b/docs/tutorials/cmf/index.rst
@@ -7,13 +7,12 @@ The Zope `Content Management Framework
websites. It's reasonably easy to convert a modern Zope/CMF
application to :app:`Pyramid`.
-The main difference between CMF and :app:`Pyramid` is that
-:app:`Pyramid` does not advertise itself as a system into which you
-can plug arbitrary "packages" that extend a system-supplied management
-user interface. You *could* build a CMF-like layer on top of
-:app:`Pyramid` (as CMF is built on Zope) but none currently exists.
-For those sorts of high-extensibility, highly-regularized-UI systems,
-CMF is still the better choice.
+The main difference between CMF and :app:`Pyramid` is that :app:`Pyramid`
+does not advertise itself as a system into which you can plug arbitrary
+"packages" that extend a system-supplied management user interface. You
+*could* build a CMF-like layer on top of :app:`Pyramid` but none currently
+exists. For those sorts of high-extensibility, highly-regularized-UI
+systems, CMF is still the better choice.
:app:`Pyramid` (and other more lightweight systems) is often a
better choice when you're building the a user interface from scratch,