As of 1.2.3 the built-in django is at 1.0.  However, the app-engine-
patch project is using 1.1RC and has a few modules already ported,
including admin.  To me, using this as a base seems to be the best
option we have.  Built-in or django-helper we'd find our selves
redoing alot of whats already in app-engine-patch.

On Aug 26, 5:05 pm, Griffin Caprio <[email protected]>
wrote:
> I also remember some issues with the forms package, but that could  
> have been because AppEngine was using a version of Django pre-
> newforms.  They still use Django 0.96.1.  IMHO, this is all moot until  
> they upgrade to 1.1 though.
>
> Griffin Caprio - Founder & President, 1530 Technologies, Inc.
> [email protected]
>
> On Aug 26, 2009, at 9:30 AM, Hazzadous wrote:
>
>
>
> > The main issue is the difference in the interfaces of the database
> > models.  I suppose another issue may be that certain queries in
> > satchmo may well not have a mapping to a query in datastore language.
>
> > When then also have the task of checking dependencies are compatible
> > with appengine, and porting them when not.
>
> > I consider it to be well worth the hassle though.  Have Google deal
> > with server maintenance, application execution, versioning, developer
> > access etc. is a huge benefit leaving me to concentrate on my app.
> > logic.
>
> > I envisage it would also open up Satchmo to a couple more target
> > audiences also; being able to simply update to appengine a sample
> > satchmo project akin to app-engine-patch would mean it would not be
> > out of the question for someone who is primarily user interface to
> > upload the sample to appengine, make whatever changes to templates and
> > have a shop front up and running without any thought given to the host
> > it is running on.  Further, hosting a blogger.com style satchmo
> > service on appengine (login with Google Account, create shop,
> > associate shop with Google Apps Domain, fill out products, choose from
> > a default style, or pay to have a custom design).
>
> > There's still plenty of meat on that bone.  Throw it in appengine with
> > some ads …baby, you’ve got a stew goin'!
>
> > Harry
>
> > On Aug 26, 12:07 am, Griffin Caprio <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >> I would be interested in helping to take a look at that.  From the
> >> little I used of App Engine, it's non-trivial to get a Django app up
> >> and running on it, let alone something like Satchmo.  However, given
> >> the memory / processing needs of Satchmo, it seems like a natural
> >> evolution for deployment.
>
> >> On Aug 25, 2009, at 5:02 PM, Hazzadous wrote:
>
> >>> Are we talking project as in a shop, or a satchmo app.  Personally  
> >>> at
> >>> the top of my list is Satchmo on AppEngine.  Is this something you
> >>> would be interested in working on?
>
> >>> On Aug 24, 5:28 pm, Hazzadous <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>> Anything your thinking or in particular?
>
> >>>> On Aug 24, 5:12 pm, Anthony Cintron <[email protected]>
> >>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>> Any Satchmo Devs looking for a project to work on?  If you're free
> >>>>> and
> >>>>> interested please contact me.
>
> >>>>> thanks,
>
> >>>>> Anthony Cintron
> >>>>> Application Developer
> >>>>> Call: +1 718 925 3915
> >>>>> E-mail: [email protected]
> >>>>> Web site: sweetiesandgangsters.net/promo
> >>>>> Blog: codegasm.blogspot.com
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Satchmo 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/satchmo-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to