On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 12:18 AM, Robert Collins <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Julian Edwards > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Thursday 19 August 2010 10:38:48 Stuart Bishop wrote: >>> Sugar was offering some SQLObject like extensions is not used. I >>> personally felt we would be better off without them and we should just >>> do things the Storm preferred way or get the improvements in Storm >>> core. In particular, it hard codes 'id' as an integer primary key >>> which is no longer the case. >> >> I completely agree. >> >> We should be looking to use Storm and pushing upstream to improve it, not >> creating yet more local changes. > > Absolutely. Creating a default implementation of a hook which links > into a non-storm facility is hardly a local change though.
We still want a local subclass of Storm. I just think we should start with an empty one, not Sugar. -- Stuart Bishop <[email protected]> http://www.stuartbishop.net/ _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
