Kevin Dangoor wrote: > One of the patches we have for SQLAlchemy 0.2 support in TG switches > from using ActiveMapper for the identity classes to using the straight > SQLAlchemy model. The argument that I can see for making that change > is that ActiveMapper is an "extension", so it's not quite as supported > as the standard data mapper approach. The disadvantage is that it's > more verbose and may not be as easy to grok for new users. > > What opinions do you all have?
Making hard things possible is important, and the reason I've decided to use SQLAlchemy over SQLObject -- but that doesn't mean one should sacrifice making easy things easy, which is what ActiveMapper is good for. Granted, I've had to run the SVN build of SQLAlchemy to get ActiveMapper-based Identity to work with SA 0.2 (I took the 0.2-support patch out of the relevant bug and then manually reversed the switch away from ActiveMapper)... but that done, it *does* work, and it gives a good template off of which to get started building my own model. Part of providing an easy ramp-up for beginners is making working examples easily accessible, and having the Identity classes use ActiveMapper does that. And as other folks have said -- the only way to get the bugs out (and, as has been more the case for me, the only way to find and document the places where a new user can make mistakes) is to use it. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" 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/turbogears -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
