Am 31.08.2006 um 05:34 schrieb Adrian Holovaty: > On 8/30/06, Jay Parlar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> A question then: Once the SQLAlchemy stuff is in and solid, will >> there >> be any reason *not* to use it? > > We'll decide that when we get there, but I'm inclined to answer your > question with a single word: "Simplicity." Django will continue to > work out of the box, with no dependencies.
"No dependencies" is just one part of simplicity :-) Moving Django to SQLAlchemy wholesale would get rid of (or at least simplify) much of the DB code in Django. Adding SQLAlchemy support as an option is likely to increase the complexity of the code, and you basically have two different code paths to the database... patching and testing gets harder, understanding the code gets harder, writing and understanding the documentation gets harder. It's definitely a good idea to develop SQLAlchemy support as an optional alternative to the built-in ORM for now. But if the project works out, replacing the built-in DB code with SQLAlchemy is going to make a *lot* of sense IMO. Cheers, Chris -- Christopher Lenz cmlenz at gmx.de http://www.cmlenz.net/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
