On Sep 16, 2010, at 2:56 PM, Chris Withers wrote: > Hi All, > > As part of looking into #1919, I see that if a table of the same name as the > one passed to tometadata already exists in the destination metadata, then the > table object passed in is ignored and the one already there is returned. > > That feels wrong to me. In the event there's already a table there, chances > are it's not going to match the table I'm trying to copy to that metadata. > > As such, I'd expect an exception to be raised rather than the other table > object being returned. What do people feel about this?
Im fine with tometadata raising for 0.7. a warning for 0.6 perhaps. note that tometadata has never been a real mainstreamy kind of function. I thought it does copy constraints though. > > cheers, > > Chris > > -- > Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing & Python Consulting > - http://www.simplistix.co.uk > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sqlalchemy" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en.
