On 07/10/2013 01:36 AM, David Ripton wrote:
On 07/09/2013 12:46 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 07/08/2013 08:32 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 07/08/2013 04:50 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Mon, 2013-07-08 at 15:53 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
Hi,
Since python-sqlalchemy 0.8.2 has been uploaded to
Hi,
Since python-sqlalchemy 0.8.2 has been uploaded to Sid, Quantum is
uninstallable there right now (see #715294).
I am wondering: what's wrong with sqlalchemy = 0.8, so that it is
written explicitly in the requirements that we shouldn't use it? Is
there a chance that having such a version of
Hi Thomas,
I would prefer to avoid such things at this moment.
First of all we are using different wrappers around sqlalchemy in different
projects.
There is a lot of hacks and they could probably produce hidden bugs.
Also our db code is not fully covered by tests. So I would prefer to:
1)
On 07/08/2013 08:53 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
Hi,
Since python-sqlalchemy 0.8.2 has been uploaded to Sid, Quantum is
uninstallable there right now (see #715294).
I am wondering: what's wrong with sqlalchemy = 0.8, so that it is
written explicitly in the requirements that we shouldn't use
On Mon, 2013-07-08 at 15:53 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
Hi,
Since python-sqlalchemy 0.8.2 has been uploaded to Sid, Quantum is
uninstallable there right now (see #715294).
I am wondering: what's wrong with sqlalchemy = 0.8, so that it is
written explicitly in the requirements that we
On 07/08/2013 04:50 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Mon, 2013-07-08 at 15:53 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
Hi,
Since python-sqlalchemy 0.8.2 has been uploaded to Sid, Quantum is
uninstallable there right now (see #715294).
I am wondering: what's wrong with sqlalchemy = 0.8, so that it is
written
