Not because I'm never going to give up, but because there are 2 points that needed to be addressed, I am now resurrecting this thread once more:
1. First, surprisingly but consistently, the message gets distorted, and for the benefit of the original poster and at least 5 or 6 other Python and DB2 enthusiasts in the community, I'd like to clean up the noise once again and address anyone in the community that has a vested interest in the subject 2. And second, does the majority of Django community really think a web framework documentation as SQLAlchemy has is "onerous" (i.e. according to dictionary: "troublesome or oppressive; burdensome ") ? I hope not, but some may disagree and I can understand that, if given some context. So, the 2 issues that cry for clarification: 1. The original message was in brief: there is a growing interest in the Python community for DB2 support, and we (developers behind IBM_DB driver, DB-API wrapper and SQLAlchemy adapter) are interested to help in the Django context if some _minimal_ documentation is provided in an unrestricted form, even under a Open Source license like BSD (even with sample/example API usage code, for that matter). If those interested parties, which may unlikely include core Django developers will be able to produce such minimal subset docs (of external APIs required), and this docs could be reviewed informally by Django gurus through this forum, then we can probably have "lift-off" relatively soon after. Conclusion: it's not a call to Django core developers, and we do respect their opinion and limited time on the subject, it's a call to interested parties already asking for ways to get this started, therefore it's certainly far from any perceived "friction". I can only hope, core Django developers would not feel any such pressure, but just acknowledge the trend. 2. In more than one occasion, the _minimal_ "DB vendor specific" doc (dev guide) was construed as "documenting internals", "burden", "heavy- weight", while the request was specifically targeting the opposite: solely API _externals_ (signature, and contract, i.e. input/output params and entry/exit conditions), as-lightweight-as-possible-to-get- started to run compliance test suite. It is what worked with Rails and SQLAlchemy, and I can hardly see why it wouldn't work with Django. The way it worked with SQLAlchemy was to have one of the most motivated community member (Thanks Ken!), not a core SA dev, submit a minimal set of API signatures that were a "must implement" priority, and then step-by-step through direct dialogue we found missing pieces of info that helped us fix the test suite failures. That's were I also need to thank Florian Bösch and Michael Bayer for their help with entry point support in SQLAlchemy. Really wonderful people in the SQLAlchemy dev community ! But I think Jacob got it quite right in a post above: "Let's all shut up ... and write some documentation :) "... It's a message mostly for the Python and DB2 enthusiasts in this Django community, and we hope to help them, too. Thanks for reading this through with patience :-) Alex P --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
