> But have you given any thought as to positioning against SQLAlechemy? > > It's a totally appropriate answer to say that you'll just continue working > on SQLObject and not really pay attention to what others are doing, of > course. > > But I think that if we want to continue to get new users, we need to have a > reason to be chosen over SQLAlcehmy. Perhaps because we're easier to use or > faster, or whatever.
Sqlobject is easier to use and is more lightweight than sqlalchemy. Correspondingly the learning curve is much less steep so for small projects many would find it more appropriate. It's like bash vs. python. For simple things python is an overkill, for more complex things bash is not powerful enough and one should go with python. > I started using SQLObject because Turbogears recommended it. Unfortunately > they now recommend SQLAlchemy. :( I also use turbogears with sqlobject. Both the current (1.x) and the next (2.x) version of tg supports sqlobject. For 2.x the default will indeed be sqlalchemy but that should not stop us from using sqlobject since that will continue to be supported. > It might be nice to dialogue with the Turobgears community and ask them what > we could do to improve the product so that it would be the default choice > again. I don't think that will ever happen. Then again it should not matter what the default is, the only relevant thing is whether sqlobject is supported or not by the framework and it seems the tg developers intend to support it in future versions (at least 2.x). Cheers, Daniel ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ sqlobject-discuss mailing list sqlobject-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sqlobject-discuss