On 6/29/06, Jonathan LaCour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kevin Dangoor wrote: > > > It seems to me that an implicit integer primary key would be a nice > > feature for ActiveMapper. If a primary key is defined, of course, that > > wouldn't be added... but for brand new databases, an int primary key > > makes good sense and is easy to work with. > > This would certainly make ActiveMapper more SQLObject-like, which would > probably be a good thing since they have the same target audience. I > would like this very much as long as there is a way to disable it.
Ahh, that's a good point. There are some cases where people have no primary key. > Are you planning on implementing this, or are you asking if someone is > willing to do it? I have no immediate plans or time to implement this... it's just something I noticed when I was writing a test case just now. Kevin Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Sqlalchemy-users mailing list Sqlalchemy-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sqlalchemy-users
