I was wondering how close could a SQLObject compatible API (fictional name: ObjectAlchemy) placed on top of SQLAlchemy come to SQLObject.
I don't remember where, but someone had suggested this a few months ago (development of SQLObject2 ORM layer based on SQLAlchemy, instead of using http://sqlobject.org/sqlapi/). This suggestion sounded very rational to me, but it seems the SQLObject team-lead has not followed it. Some people on the SQLObject list sayed that ActiveMapper comes already as close to SQLObject as possible.[1] Is this true? If so, what would be the reason to stay with SQLObject (seeing the quite inactive project and the non-existent version SQLObject2 / SQL-API version)? A final question: Provides ActiveMapper all functionality of SQLObject, even if not API compatible? [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.sqlobject/7033/focus=7033 . --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
