On 3/18/06, Alan Franzoni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Now, my 2c: do we really need *two* ORMs in the Python community?

I agree that we do not.

But really this sentiment should be directed towards Ian Bicking; he's finally (implicitly) admitted that SqlObject is a dead end, but instead of throwing his weight behind a better ORM, he insists on fragmenting things again.  Oh, well.

It would be nice to have a kind of SQLObject class to inherit from in
SQLAlchemy, or something similar.

Consider contributing to Jonathan LaCour's activemapper code in the sqlalchemy.ext submodule.  I think this does more or less what you want.
 
Haven't you (Ian and Micheal) ever
considered a merge?

Perhaps if more people urged Ian to consider this, he would.  I know I have, to no effect.  He doesn't even want to re-use the lower-level (sql) layer of SA.  Maybe his vision of how ORM should work is really so different that the world does need an SqlObject2.  But I doubt it.

OTOH, Michael's been quite open to ideas from others, as activemapper or my own sqlsoup illustrate.

--
Jonathan Ellis
http://spyced.blogspot.com

Reply via email to