We Keep Coding

ESB for Python? [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Questions asking us to recommend or find a tool, library or favorite off-site resource are off-topic for Stack Overflow as they tend to attract opinionated answers and spam. Instead, describe the problem and what has been done so far to solve it.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
At work we're debating choosing an off-the-shelf full-stack ESB (Enterprise Service Bus -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enterprise_service_bus ) versus rolling our own around an AMQP system such as RabbitMQ.
Part of the concern is that our ecosystem is PHP moving as fast as possible to Python, and what APIs we already have all pass messages in JSON. The search space on ESBs and 'SOA solutions' is really, really polluted; either that or this just isn't a Python Thing(tm). Thus I ask here: it seems that all full-stack ESB solutions that we've considered are primarily focused on integrating SOAP-based components. That seems like a lot of double wrapping and unwrapping of messages that we may not want to do. Also, we'd really like to write our service-to-ESB adapters in Python if we can.
I should note here that the PHP/Python ecosystem is internal -- many of our clients are fairly hidebound organizations using big monolithic enterpriseware with which our apps integrate. They would be happy with SOAP, XML-RPC etc for our customer-facing APIs. We've already had requests. So, at the border, we may end up eventually providing both JSON-based and SOAP-based services; just not internally.
tl;dr: Does anybody have a favored full-stack ESB for use with Python apps? What about a non-favored one that you've worked with (and how terrible was it, anyway)? Do you think that wrapping something like RabbitMQ is a better idea for a PHP/Python ecosystem?

It really is a big question, more like a couple of questions in one, if I may. So please excuse me if I misunderstood you.
An ESB is, by definition, not really coupled to your choice of language in implementing your applications. So no matter if your apps that you want to connect in a SOA manner are written in PHP or Python, you should be able to expose them in a SOA. JSON on the other hand is a bit of an off choice in the SOA world and this choice is really important.
Many of the COTS ESBs offer some level of REST support. Mule, ServiceMix, WSO2, JBoss are some open source ones. If you prefer to go with a commercial vendor I believe Tibco and Oracle have either out-of-the-box support or can be implemented with a bit of coding.
Your choice of using any of the message brokers such as RabbitMQ or AMQP is really about the transport - which is once again not really directly related. Then again, if your goal is to add messaging among your applications it is a valid question which I cannot really answer.
If you can write your main motivation for your interest in an ESB it would be helpful for a better answer.
HTH

Wow...that's quite the question, and there's no way that I can answer it fully...but since you asked here's the proverbial 2 cents:
RabbitMQ is pretty good. I'm using it for real-time messaging in a multi-agent system that implements caching on a scientific computing grid. One of the nice features of RabbitMQ is that you can push arbitrary (including binary) messages, which might be a nice feature for performance. (Perhaps using the serialization / deserialization from the Hessian protocol?)
My only concern with RabbitMQ would be the continued support of the python libraries for AMQP. The current libraries are functional, I've used them...but they haven't been around long, and I'm not sure how big the community is that's interested in and supporting such work. That said, it seems like RabbitMQ (AMQP, and messaging in general) are becoming a hotter topic as of late, and hopefully that would broaden the base that's working on the python - AMQP interface libraries.

XML-RPC for an object broker

is there any good reason not to use XML-RPC for an object-broker server/client architecture? Maybe something like "no it's already outfashioned, there is X for that now".
To give you more details: I want to build a framework which allows for standardized interaction and the exchange of results between many little tools (e. g. command-line tools). In case someone wants to integrate another tool she writes a wrapper for that purpose. The wrapper could, e. g., convert the STDOUT of a tool into objects usable by the architecture.
Currently I'm thinking of writing the proof-of-concept server in Python. Later it could be rewritten in C/C++. Just to make sure clients can be written in as many languages as possible I thought of using XML-RPC. CORBA seems to be too bloated for that purpose, since the server shouldn't be too complex.
Thanks for your advice and opinions,
Rainer

XML-RPC has a lot going for it. It's simple to create and to consume, easy to understand and easy to code for.
I'd say avoid SOAP and CORBA like the plague. They are way too complex, and with SOAP you have endless problems because only implementations from single vendors tend to interact nicely - probably because the complexity of the standard leads to varying interpretations.
You may want to consider a RESTful architecture. REST and XML-RPC cannot be directly compared. XML-RPC is a specific implementation of RPC, and REST is an architectural style. REST does not mandate anything much - it's more a style of approach with a bunch of conventions and suggestions. REST can look a lot like XML-RPC, but it doesn't have to.
Have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representational_State_Transfer and some of the externally linked articles.
One of the goals of REST is that by creating a stateless interface over HTTP, you allow the use of standard caching mechanisms and load balancing mechanisms without having to invent new ways of doing what has already been well solved by HTTP.
Having read about REST, which hopefully is an interesting read, you may decide that for your project XML-RPC is still the best solution, which would be a perfectly reasonable conclusion depending on what exactly you are trying to achieve.

Python after Ruby on Rails [closed]

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I have been working with Ruby on Rails for over a year now and have been offered some development work with Python. I would like know if development with Python is as enjoyable as Ruby in terms of the clarity and ease of use. And how well is Python suited for Web development. I've heard of Pylons being a direct port of the Rails framework but does it provide the same level of comfort and features. Are there any popular websites built using Python and a framework that offers the same level of flexibilty as Rails.
Because Rails doesn't seem like work.

Django is one of the most famous. It follows a different approach to web devlopment then ruby does, but it is just as powerful and feature rich. An example website running Django is lawrence.com
Pylons is another popular one, I don't know why you heard it was a Rails clone, because it is not. It is a lightweight framework that leverages the power of other open-source projects to give you flexibility in implementation. For example, you can choose to use SQLAlchemy, SQLObject or CouchDB for managing your database. Or you can choose between Mako, Genshi, Jinja2, or whatever you like for your templates. I think you get the picture. Some example website running of pylons are: freebase and Charlie Rose
There exist other web framework as well, but they are less popular.
Notably, TurboGears, which is now built upon Pylons. I would say it tries to pack more juice then pylons does, but it also constrain you more as it assumes more decisions for you. Still, you can stay away from them and do as you please, but it starts with a more constrained framework.
The last one I will mention is Zope, which is the big commercially backed one, that has been there for a while now, but I don't have much experience with it. I do believe it is the less "fun" to work with, but that's just my feeling, you can check it out yourself.
All in all, it comes down to your workflow, I personally, do not enjoy Ruby as a language as much as I do Python and it is natural that I thus like to work with python for web development then Ruby. You really need to try them out yourself, at least the first two I mentioned, try to build a small website, just to get a feel for it. All I can say is from my experience, people either like Rails or Python, not both...
Good Luck!

One very good web development framework is Django

The main two frameworks in Python are Pylons (with the coaligned Turbogears framework) and the more popular Django. Django stomps everything for doing content-based sites (CMS etc) because the admin is excellent.
However, your question makes you sound very much enthused with Ruby and I doubt you'll find anything you like as much. It goes both ways: I'm pretty meh on Rails but really like Python and node.js.

I have done a lot of work with Python in the past year, mostly using Django. I enjoy it, and agree with others that it's great for content-heavy sites. Python and all of its frameworks very much follow the mantra of there being one correct way of doing things. I have learned that most of my pain extending Django lies in me approaching a problem wrongly and need to refactor the code. If you are a precise, logically-driven thinker, you'll enjoy Python a lot.
As far as websites that use Python for a code base, the biggest may be reddit and its family of sites. Django's website also lists sites that use it. I haven't had the privilege of using Pylons, but I also hear good things about it.

Clarity and ease of use are some of Pythons biggest selling points. In saying that, the different Python web frameworks cover almost the entire spectrum from small and simple all the way up to large and complex with everything in between.
You should find that most Python web frameworks have less 'magic' than Rails - ie they are a bit more explicit which is arguably better from the clarity point of view.
In my opinion, even if you enjoy Rails and don't ever plan on leaving, you should still try out other languages and frameworks occasionally to give you a broader perspective.
Personally I like Turbogears2, but I think Django would make a good starting point for a Rails developer that wanted to try out something else.

Which of these scripting languages is more appropriate for pen-testing? [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
First of all, I want to avoid a flame-war on languages. The languages to choose from are Perl, Python and Ruby . I want to mention that I'm comfortable with all of them, but the problem is that I can't focus just on one.
If, for example, I see a cool Perl module, I have to try it out. If I see a nice Python app, I have to know how it's made. If I see a Ruby DSL or some Ruby voodoo, I'm hooked on Ruby for a while.
Right now I'm working as a Java developer, but plan on taking CEH in the near future. My question is: for tool writing and exploit development, which language do you find to be the most appropriate?
Again, I don't want to cause a flame-war or any trouble, I just want honest opinions from scripters that know what they're doing.
One more thing: maybe some of you will ask "Why settle on one language?". To answer this: I would like to choose only one language, in order to try to master it.

You probably want Ruby, because it's the native language for Metasploit, which is the de facto standard open source penetration testing framework. Ruby's going to give you:
Metasploit's framework, opcode and shellcode databases
Metasploit's Ruby lorcon bindings for raw 802.11 work.
Metasploit's KARMA bindings for 802.11 clientside redirection.
Libcurl and net/http for web tool writing.
EventMachine for web proxy and fuzzing work (or RFuzz, which extends the well-known Mongrel webserver).
Metasm for shellcode generation.
Distorm for x86 disassembly.
BinData for binary file format fuzzing.
Second place here goes to Python. There are more pentesting libraries available in Python than in Ruby (but not enough to offset Metasploit). Commercial tools tend to support Python as well --- if you're an Immunity CANVAS or CORE Impact customer, you want Python. Python gives you:
Twisted for network access.
PaiMei for program tracing and programmable debugging.
CANVAS and Impact support.
Dornseif's firewire libraries for remote debugging.
Ready integration with WinDbg for remote Windows kernel debugging (there's still no good answer in Ruby for kernel debugging, which is why I still occasionally use Python).
Peach Fuzzer and Sully for fuzzing.
SpikeProxy for web penetration testing (also, OWASP Pantera).
Unsurprisingly, a lot of web work uses Java tools. The de facto standard web pentest tool is Burp Suite, which is a Java swing app. Both Ruby and Python have Java variants you can use to get access to tools like that. Also, both Ruby and Python offer:
Direct integration with libpcap for raw packet work.
OpenSSL bindings for crypto.
IDA Pro extensions.
Mature (or at least reasonable) C foreign function interfaces for API access.
WxWindows for UI work, and decent web stacks for web UIs.
You're not going to go wrong with either language, though for mainstream pentest work, Metasploit probably edges out all the Python benefits, and at present, for x86 reversing work, Python's superior debugging interfaces edge out all the Ruby benefits.
Also: it's 2008. They're not "scripting languages". They're programming languages. ;)

[Disclaimer: I am primarily a Perl programmer, which may be colouring my judgement. However, I am not a particularly tribal one, and I think on this particular question my argument is reasonably objective.]
Perl was designed to blend seamlessly into the Unix landscape, and that is why it feels so alien to people with a mainly-OO background (particularly the Java school of OOP). For that reason, though, it’s incredibly widely installed on machines with any kind of Unixoid OS, and many vendor system utilities are written in it. Also for the same reason, servers that have neither Python nor Ruby installed are still likely to have Perl on them, again making it important to have some familiarity with. So if your CEH activity includes extensive activity on Unix, you will have to have some amount of familiarity with Perl anyway, and you might as well focus on it.
That said, it is largely a matter of preference. There is not much to differentiate the languages; their expressive power is virtually identical. Some things are a little easier in one of the languages, some a little easier in another.
In terms of libraries I do not know how Ruby and Python compare against each other – I do know that Perl has them beat by a margin. Then again, sometimes (particularly when you’re looking for libraries for common needs) the only effect of that is that you get deluged with choices. And if you are only looking to do things in some particular area which is well covered by libraries for Python or Ruby, the mass of other stuff on CPAN isn’t necessarily an advantage. In niche areas, however, it matters, and you never know what unforeseen need you will eventually have (err, by definition).
For one-liner use on the command line, Python is kind of a non-starter.
In terms of interactive interpreter environment, Perl… uhm… well, you can use the debugger, which is not that great, or you can install one from CPAN, but Perl doesn’t ship a good one itself.
So I think Perl does have a very slight edge for your needs in particular, but only just. If you pick Ruby you’ll probably not be much worse off at all. Python might inconvenience you a little more noticeably, but it too is hardly a bad choice.

I could make an argument for all three :-)
Perl has all of CPAN - giving you a huge advantage in pulling together functionality quickly. It also has a nice flexible testing infrastructure that means you can plug lots of different automated testing styles (including tests in other languages) in the same framework.
Ruby is a lovely language to learn - and lacks some of the cruft in Perl 5. If you're doing web based testing it also has the watir library - which is trez useful (see http://wtr.rubyforge.org/)
Python - nice language and (while it's not to my personal preference) some folk find the way its structured easier to get to grips with.
Any of them (and many others) would be a great language to learn.
Instead of looking at the language - I'd look at your working environment. It's always easier to learn stuff if you have other folk around who are doing similar stuff. If you current dev/testing folk are already focussed on one of the above - I'd go for that. If not, pick the one that would be most applicable/useful to your current working environment. Chat to the rest of your team and see what they think.

That depends on the implementation, if it will be distributed I would go with Java, seeing as you know that, because of its portability. If it is just for internal use, or will be used in semi-controlled environments, then go with whatever you are the most comfortable maintaining, and whichever has the best long-term outlook.
Now to just answer the question, I would go with Perl, but I'm a linux guy so I may be a bit biased in this.

If you plan on using Metasploit for pen-testing and exploit development I would recommend ruby as mentioned previously Metasploit is written in ruby and any exploit/module development you may wish to do will require ruby.
If you will be using Immunity CANVAS for pen testing then for the same reasons I would recommend Python as CANVAS is written in python. Also allot of fuzzing frameworks like Peach and Sulley are written in Python.
I would not recommend Perl as you will find very little tools/scripts/frameworks related to pen testing/fuzzing/exploits/... in Perl.
As your question is "tool writing and exploit development" I would recommend Ruby if you choose Metasploit or python if you choose CANVAS.
hope that helps :)

Speaking as a CEH, learn the CEH material first. This will expose you to a variety of tools and platforms used to mount various kinds of attacks. Once you understand your target well, look into the capabilities of the tools and platforms already available (the previously mentioned metasploit framework is very thorough and robust). How can they be extended to meet your needs? Once you know that, you can compare the capabilities of the languages.
I would also recommend taking a look at the tools available on the BackTrack distro.

All of them should be sufficient for that. Unless you need some library that is only available in one language, I'd let personal preference guide me.

If you're looking for a scripting language that will play well with Java, you might want to look at Groovy. It has the flexibility and power of Perl (closures, built in regexes, associative arrays on every corner) but you can access Java code from it thus you have access to a huge number of libraries, and in particular the rest of the system you're developing.

metasploit is a great framework for penetration testing. It's mainly written in Ruby, so if you know that language well, maybe you can hook in there. However, to use metasploit, you don't need to know any language at all.

If you are interested in CEH, I'd take a look at Grey Hat Python. It shows some stuff that is pretty interesting and related.
That being said, any language should be fine.

Well, what kind of exploits are you thinking about? If you want to write something that needs low level stuff (ptrace, raw sockets, etc.) then you'll need to learn C. But both Perl and Python can be used. The real question is which one suits your style more?
As for toolmaking, Perl has good string-processing abilities, is closer to the system, has good support, but IMHO it's very confusing. I prefer Python: it's a clean, easy to use, easy to learn language with good support (complete language/lib reference, 3rd party libs, etc.). And it's (strictly IMHO) cool.

I'm with tqbf. I've worked with Python and Ruby. Currently I'm working with JRuby. It has all the power of Ruby with access to the Java libraries so if there is something you absolutely need a low-level language to solve you can do so with a high-level language. So far I haven't needed to really use much Java as Ruby has had the ability to do everything I've needed as an API tester.

Is Python good for big software projects (not web based)? [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
Right now I'm developing mostly in C/C++, but I wrote some small utilities in Python to automatize some tasks and I really love it as language (especially the productivity).
Except for the performances (a problem that could be sometimes solved thanks to the ease of interfacing Python with C modules), do you think it is proper for production use in the development of stand-alone complex applications (think for example to a word processor or a graphic tool)?
What IDE would you suggest? The IDLE provided with Python is not enough even for small projects in my opinion.

We've used IronPython to build our flagship spreadsheet application (40kloc production code - and it's Python, which IMO means loc per feature is low) at Resolver Systems, so I'd definitely say it's ready for production use of complex apps.
There are two ways in which this might not be a useful answer to you :-)
We're using IronPython, not the more usual CPython. This gives us the huge advantage of being able to use .NET class libraries. I may be setting myself up for flaming here, but I would say that I've never really seen a CPython application that looked "professional" - so having access to the WinForms widget set was a huge win for us. IronPython also gives us the advantage of being able to easily drop into C# if we need a performance boost. (Though to be honest we have never needed to do that. All of our performance problems to date have been because we chose dumb algorithms rather than because the language was slow.) Using C# from IP is much easier than writing a C Extension for CPython.
We're an Extreme Programming shop, so we write tests before we write code. I would not write production code in a dynamic language without writing the tests first; the lack of a compile step needs to be covered by something, and as other people have pointed out, refactoring without it can be tough. (Greg Hewgill's answer suggests he's had the same problem. On the other hand, I don't think I would write - or especially refactor - production code in any language these days without writing the tests first - but YMMV.)
Re: the IDE - we've been pretty much fine with each person using their favourite text editor; if you prefer something a bit more heavyweight then WingIDE is pretty well-regarded.

You'll find mostly two answers to that – the religous one (Yes! Of course! It's the best language ever!) and the other religious one (you gotta be kidding me! Python? No... it's not mature enough). I will maybe skip the last religion (Python?! Use Ruby!). The truth, as always, is far from obvious.
Pros: it's easy, readable, batteries included, has lots of good libraries for pretty much everything. It's expressive and dynamic typing makes it more concise in many cases.
Cons: as a dynamic language, has way worse IDE support (proper syntax completion requires static typing, whether explicit in Java or inferred in SML), its object system is far from perfect (interfaces, anyone?) and it is easy to end up with messy code that has methods returning either int or boolean or object or some sort under unknown circumstances.
My take – I love Python for scripting, automation, tiny webapps and other simple well defined tasks. In my opinion it is by far the best dynamic language on the planet. That said, I would never use it any dynamically typed language to develop an application of substantial size.
Say – it would be fine to use it for Stack Overflow, which has three developers and I guess no more than 30k lines of code. For bigger things – first your development would be super fast, and then once team and codebase grow things are slowing down more than they would with Java or C#. You need to offset lack of compilation time checks by writing more unittests, refactorings get harder cause you never know what your refacoring broke until you run all tests or even the whole big app, etc.
Now – decide on how big your team is going to be and how big the app is supposed to be once it is done. If you have 5 or less people and the target size is roughly Stack Overflow, go ahead, write in Python. You will finish in no time and be happy with good codebase. But if you want to write second Google or Yahoo, you will be much better with C# or Java.
Side-note on C/C++ you have mentioned: if you are not writing performance critical software (say massive parallel raytracer that will run for three months rendering a film) or a very mission critical system (say Mars lander that will fly three years straight and has only one chance to land right or you lose $400mln) do not use it. For web apps, most desktop apps, most apps in general it is not a good choice. You will die debugging pointers and memory allocation in complex business logic.

In my opinion python is more than ready for developing complex applications. I see pythons strength more on the server side than writing graphical clients. But have a look at http://www.resolversystems.com/. They develop a whole spreadsheet in python using the .net ironpython port.
If you are familiar with eclipse have a look at pydev which provides auto-completion and debugging support for python with all the other eclipse goodies like svn support. The guy developing it has just been bought by aptana, so this will be solid choice for the future.
#Marcin
Cons: as a dynamic language, has way
worse IDE support (proper syntax
completion requires static typing,
whether explicit in Java or inferred
in SML),
You are right, that static analysis may not provide full syntax completion for dynamic languages, but I thing pydev gets the job done very well. Further more I have a different development style when programming python. I have always an ipython session open and with one F5 I do not only get the perfect completion from ipython, but object introspection and manipulation as well.
But if you want to write second Google
or Yahoo, you will be much better with
C# or Java.
Google just rewrote jaiku to work on top of App Engine, all in python. And as far as I know they use a lot of python inside google too.

I really like python, it's usually my language of choice these days for small (non-gui) stuff that I do on my own.
However, for some larger Python projects I've tackled, I'm finding that it's not quite the same as programming in say, C++. I was working on a language parser, and needed to represent an AST in Python. This is certainly within the scope of what Python can do, but I had a bit of trouble with some refactoring. I was changing the representation of my AST and changing methods and classes around a lot, and I found I missed the strong typing that would be available to me in a C++ solution. Python's duck typing was almost too flexible and I found myself adding a lot of assert code to try to check my types as the program ran. And then I couldn't really be sure that everything was properly typed unless I had 100% code coverage testing (which I didn't at the time).
Actually, that's another thing that I miss sometimes. It's possible to write syntactically correct code in Python that simply won't run. The compiler is incapable of telling you about it until it actually executes the code, so in infrequently-used code paths such as error handlers you can easily have unseen bugs lurking around. Even code that's as simple as printing an error message with a % format string can fail at runtime because of mismatched types.
I haven't used Python for any GUI stuff so I can't comment on that aspect.

Python is considered (among Python programmers :) to be a great language for rapid prototyping. There's not a lot of extraneous syntax getting in the way of your thought processes, so most of the work you do tends to go into the code. (There's far less idioms required to be involved in writing good Python code than in writing good C++.)
Given this, most Python (CPython) programmers ascribe to the "premature optimization is the root of all evil" philosophy. By writing high-level (and significantly slower) Python code, one can optimize the bottlenecks out using C/C++ bindings when your application is nearing completion. At this point it becomes more clear what your processor-intensive algorithms are through proper profiling. This way, you write most of the code in a very readable and maintainable manner while allowing for speedups down the road. You'll see several Python library modules written in C for this very reason.
Most graphics libraries in Python (i.e. wxPython) are just Python wrappers around C++ libraries anyway, so you're pretty much writing to a C++ backend.
To address your IDE question, SPE (Stani's Python Editor) is a good IDE that I've used and Eclipse with PyDev gets the job done as well. Both are OSS, so they're free to try!
[Edit] #Marcin: Have you had experience writing > 30k LOC in Python? It's also funny that you should mention Google's scalability concerns, since they're Python's biggest supporters! Also a small organization called NASA also uses Python frequently ;) see "One coder and 17,000 Lines of Code Later".

Nothing to add to the other answers, besides that if you choose python you must use something like pylint which nobody mentioned so far.

One way to judge what python is used for is to look at what products use python at the moment. This wikipedia page has a long list including various web frameworks, content management systems, version control systems, desktop apps and IDEs.
As it says here - "Some of the largest projects that use Python are the Zope application server, YouTube, and the original BitTorrent client. Large organizations that make use of Python include Google, Yahoo!, CERN and NASA. ITA uses Python for some of its components."
So in short, yes, it is "proper for production use in the development of stand-alone complex applications". So are many other languages, with various pros and cons. Which is the best language for your particular use case is too subjective to answer, so I won't try, but often the answer will be "the one your developers know best".

Refactoring is inevitable on larger codebases and the lack of static typing makes this much harder in python than in statically typed languages.

And as far as I know they use a lot of python inside google too.
Well i'd hope so, the maker of python still works at google if i'm not mistaken?
As for the use of Python, i think it's a great language for stand-alone apps. It's heavily used in a lot of Linux programs, and there are a few nice widget sets out there to aid in the development of GUI's.

Python is a delight to use. I use it routinely and also write a lot of code for work in C#. There are two drawbacks to writing UI code in Python. one is that there is not a single ui framework that is accepted by the majority of the community. when you write in c# the .NET runtime and class libraries are all meant to work together. With Python every UI library has at's own semantics which are often at odds with the pythonic mindset in which you are trying to write your program. I am not blaming the library writers. I've tried several libraries (wxwidgets, PythonWin[Wrapper around MFC], Tkinter), When doing so I often felt that I was writing code in a language other than Python (despite the fact that it was python) because the libraries aren't exactly pythonic they are a port from another language be it c, c++, tk.
So for me I will write UI code in .NET (for me C#) because of the IDE & the consistency of the libraries. But when I can I will write business logic in python because it is more clear and more fun.

I know I'm probably stating the obvious, but don't forget that the quality of the development team and their familiarity with the technology will have a major impact on your ability to deliver.
If you have a strong team, then it's probably not an issue if they're familiar. But if you have people who are more 9 to 5'rs who aren't familiar with the technology, they will need more support and you'd need to make a call if the productivity gains are worth whatever the cost of that support is.

I had only one python experience, my trash-cli project.
I know that probably some or all problems depends of my inexperience with python.
I found frustrating these things:
the difficult of finding a good IDE for free
the limited support to automatic refactoring
Moreover:
the need of introduce two level of grouping packages and modules confuses me.
it seems to me that there is not a widely adopted code naming convention
it seems to me that there are some standard library APIs docs that are incomplete
the fact that some standard libraries are not fully object oriented annoys me
Although some python coders tell me that they does not have these problems, or they say these are not problems.

Try Django or Pylons, write a simple app with both of them and then decide which one suits you best. There are others (like Turbogears or Werkzeug) but those are the most used.