On Sep 28, 3:07 am, Thomas Wanschik wrote:
> On 28 Sep., 02:45, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
> We've started a supported/unsupported feature list on
> djangopackages:http://www.djangopackages.com/grids/g/cloud/
>
> So please help in order to
On 28 Sep., 02:45, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> So - the real goal is to ensure that you can use forms and generic
> views with NoSQL stores, not to ensure that you take an app built
> using a relational store, and deploy it on a NoSQL store.
If that's the real goal
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:31 AM, David P. Novakovic
wrote:
> This has probably been discussed at great length previously... but my
> 2c follows:
>
> If you are using a column/doc store you are trying to solve a
> different problem than if you are using an SQL db.
>
> How
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 07:22:11AM +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 1:51 AM, Mark Bucciarelli wrote:
> >
> > I guess the test suite must not cover all the basees, making it a
> > necessary but not sufficient criteria for inclusion?
> >
>
> The problem
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 1:51 AM, Mark Bucciarelli wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:21:06PM +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>>>
>>> The number 4 wasn't actually the important bit - it
This has probably been discussed at great length previously... but my
2c follows:
If you are using a column/doc store you are trying to solve a
different problem than if you are using an SQL db.
How important is 100% interop? Surely it's about documenting the
differences between them and
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 1:51 AM, Mark Bucciarelli wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:21:06PM +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>>
>> The number 4 wasn't actually the important bit - it was that I want
>> to see a range of noSQL approaches represented. I don't want to see
>> 4
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:21:06PM +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>
> The number 4 wasn't actually the important bit - it was that I want
> to see a range of noSQL approaches represented. I don't want to see
> 4 key-value stores; I want to see a key-value store, and a document
> store, and a
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 6:40 PM, Waldemar Kornewald
wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 6:54 AM, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> Also, you say a "huge" amount of analysis -- at the moment, *any*
>> analysis would be a step in the right direction. I
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 6:54 AM, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Waldemar Kornewald
> wrote:
>> On Sep 25, 4:21 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
>> wrote:
>>> My reason for wanting this is that I'm
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Waldemar Kornewald
wrote:
> On Sep 25, 4:21 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> My reason for wanting this is that I'm simply not an expert in any of
>> these backends. I know SQL quite well, but I haven't had
When a free software project fail to progress because of a bad
leadership, you can :
1) make a putsh.
2) make a fork.
Florent
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Waldemar Kornewald
wrote:
> On Sep 25, 4:21 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> My
On Sep 25, 4:21 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> My reason for wanting this is that I'm simply not an expert in any of
> these backends. I know SQL quite well, but I haven't had occasion to
> try out other backends in depth. I can judge the technical merits of a
> patch
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Waldemar Kornewald
wrote:
> Hi,
> in my last discussion on django-users Russell told me that he'd like
> to see four proof-of-concept (or better) backends before considering
> NoSQL for inclusion in trunk.
The number 4 wasn't actually the
Hi,
in my last discussion on django-users Russell told me that he'd like
to see four proof-of-concept (or better) backends before considering
NoSQL for inclusion in trunk. The primary point was that enough
eyeballs have looked at the API, first. Now we finally have four
backends for Django-nonrel:
15 matches
Mail list logo