On Oct 10, 2:15 pm, "Florent Aide" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 10/10/07, Ben Sizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What is the status of 1.1? How many changes to 1.0 code are typically > > needed? Does it aid eventual migration to 2.0? And is it even > > imminent? Unless I've missed something (which is entirely possible, I > > [...] > > Basically, 1.1 will introduce SQLAlchemy as the default orm (using the > 0.4 API) and thus will break code based on the 0.3 version. The good > thing is that since 1.0.4beta1 you can already install SQLAlchemy 0.4 > and make your application ready to go for 1.1 ... > 1.0 is stable. 1.0.4 should be out pretty soon and will let you > migrate to SA 0.4 if you want without imposing you the burden if don't > want.
But if I start with 1.0 today, as I intend to, what are my SQLAlchemy options like? I'm aware that it's possible to use it, and has been possible for a long time, but is the way in which it's used going to change significantly for 1.0.4beta1? > Next breaking change will certainly (still in testing...) be the > removal of the implicit transactions (in SA at the least) and session. Is it simple to start working with explicit transactions already? Searching docs.turbogears.org for 'transaction' doesn't appear to yield anything specifying how I use them, just how I would turn them off... I'd assume there's some sort of begin/end functionality somewhere. > Since 1.1 will provide also genshi (and we hope toscawidgets) by > default, it will be one more step further in the direction of 2.0. What's the situation with using Genshi in 1.0? Again, I'm aware it's possible, but how practical is it, and how compatible will it be with the way 1.1 does it? > PS: I should say that the documentation team did a wonderful job on > our documentation pages and many things which where not explained at > all are now explained in details in the wiki. I know of someone who > made me this remark that the doc was poor (He will recognize himself). > When I prompted him to look again in the wiki he was surprised by the > quantity and quality of the documentation compared to what he > remembered being present. I've not taken a detailed look at it, but at first glance I think the organisation is still quite poor, and reference materials are still treated as secondary to tutorial materials. Even the so-called references tend to be full of chat and walkthroughs instead of clear reference material (eg. IdentityManagement page, ErrorHandling page.) Not to put down the hard work of those who've contributed, just to note that there's still some way to go to be first class. -- Ben Sizer --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
