Don Arbow wrote: > I also didn't like the names that Django gave to my tables. But of > course you can name them anything you'd like using the db_table field > of the META inner class. A little more effort, but this comes in > handy when using legacy databases.
Yes, that is an option, but it doesn't really solve potential namespace conflicts within the database for multiple apps. Additionally, it doesn't jive with what seems to be a goal of Django in general: facilitating speedy development of apps with a minimum of code. The larger issue here is that, one of the uses of schemas in Postgres (and in general for other databases that support a similar feature), you can create a logical separation of data within the same database connection, and therefore within the same project. That falls well in line with how applications in Django are structured. What I'd like to know is, if I spend the time on this and do it properly (so that it plays nice with other database backends, will work easily with the old naming convention, etc) is there a chance that it would be incorporated within the project or is there zero belief in the usefulness of schemas? If the latter, why? I find them very useful. --Ed --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
