Hi Julien,
actually I am following ansi and michals works and suggestions regarding
this issues so my plan is quite in line with their suggested plan of
implementation.
I have opened a PR in dep which is very very WIP right now. I haven't been
able to address everything nicely till now, but
Thank you Anssi. It’s very useful to have your perspective as you’ve done a
lot of oversight work on this specific feature before and have lots of
experience working with the ORM internals.
So it seems like the consensus at this point is to use Michal’s original
work as a basis. I like the way
Just my late 2 cents to this...
First, I wouldn't put too much weight on the DEP proposals. Looking back to
them now, I don't think they went to the right direction.
For Michal Petrucha's work, it was really close to being merged some years
ago. The problem was that migrations happened at the
Hi Julien,
I will publish it very soon.
Thanks
On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 at 5:58:50 AM UTC+6, Julien Phalip wrote:
>
> Hi Asif,
>
> That sounds good. On first look I did have some reservations about some of
> the design details in the current DEP, especially around the observer
> pattern
Hi Michal,
Thanks for your detailed reply. Very helpful.
I was also curious, during your work did you look into SQLAlchemy? They
seem to have a pretty elaborate system for multi-column fields. I know that
overall the SQLAlchemy and Django ORMs follow a different approach, but I’m
wondering if
Hi Asif,
That sounds good. On first look I did have some reservations about some of
the design details in the current DEP, especially around the observer
pattern for data binding. But I’m going to have to dig deeper into the
implementation to get a clearer idea.
It’d be great if you could
Hi Roger,
I do agree with your points. I have some thoughts which I will share in
Dep/mailing list soon.
Thanks
On Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 6:10:38 PM UTC+6, Craig Kerstiens wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> My company (Citus Data) is interested in sponsoring some Django work. In
> particular work
On Mon, 2017-02-27 at 21:03 -0800, Asif Saifuddin wrote:
> Hi Julian,
> > > I have been also reviewing and studying the previous works, deps,
discussions, codes and tickets. I have also been working to prepare a
new dep based on the previous works.
>
I haven't had a chance to review Michael's
Hi Julian,
I have been also reviewing and studying the previous works, deps,
discussions, codes and tickets. I have also been working to prepare a new
dep based on the previous works.
Like what Michal said, from my observation, I found the works and
approaches of Michal is quite better and
Hi everyone,
I can't speak for Thomas' implementation, as I haven't had the time
and energy to look into it too much, but I can try to clarify some
aspects of what I did years ago.
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:10:55AM -0800, Julien Phalip wrote:
> Composite primary keys (GSoC)
>
>
On Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 4:10:38 AM UTC-8, Craig Kerstiens wrote:
>
> My company (Citus Data) is interested in sponsoring some Django work. In
> particular work on support for composite primary keys. From what I
> understand this wouldn't be the first time the work has been explored and
Hi all,
My company (Citus Data) is interested in sponsoring some Django work. In
particular work on support for composite primary keys. From what I
understand this wouldn't be the first time the work has been explored and
it sounds like it has a number of intricacies to it (
12 matches
Mail list logo
