Care to qualify this highly general and rather hyperbolic statement? Which specific aspects of "micro" frameworks do you find to be "evil"?

You tend to need to add features in unforeseen ways. Popular large frameworks can facilitate this more than micro-frameworks can, resulting in less work on the developer's part.

micro frameworks provide incomplete feature set. You tend to reinvent the wheel many times. I see no advantage in using them when I can have something more complete and feature rich.

Because as your app grows and you need more custom behavior, you find that you start stripping out the full-stack framework features and you end up with using it like a micro framework, which it wasn't designed to be so you have now have a framework mismatch.

pylons is a glue framework. It allows you to replace whatever you want, easily and without losing other framework features.

I like pylons a lot and I am using it for few projects, but I hate dependecy on many libraries, things get complicated this way very soon. For smaller sites I recommend web2py - it is one package and it is very straightforward and easy although Pylons seems to be more flexible.

dependencies are taken care of by pylons once it gets installed. I like that Ben made it this way because many of these dependencies can be reused in other projects.

Has anyone else moved over to Pyramid (next iteration for Pylons - particularly with the Akhet suite : mako, beaker, SQLalchemy)? I'm surprised it isn't mentioned on HN more.

I liked Pylons and I wanted to like Pyramid but couldn't get into it. Then I discovered Flask (http://flask.pocoo.org) and moved on to using it with Bulbflow (http://bulbflow.com).