>> That said please stop the FUD, TG on CP people do not want to fork, >> they just want to keep their old apps running. > > Hi all, > > I think the level of frustration and emotion is rising a little higher > than is helpful here. > > Perhaps we can find a clear, helpful, obvious path forward from here. > > What I'm proposing is that TG2 ship with a package tgext.sqlobject > that includes a few things to help SQLObject users out: > > 1) A model.py template that works for SQLOBject > 2) A set of repoze.what plugins for SA auth. > 3) A subclass of AppConfig with a SetupSQLObject method that sets up > SQLOBject. > 4) A transaction manager class for SQLOBject, or a dependency on an > existing one. > > I think all four of these pieces are achievable and I'm sure the TG2 > team is willing to help make them happen, but I'm not personally going > to create, maintain, and support these things on my own since I've > long since moved on from SQLObject. > > And Jorge, I think you may not be aware of how large, or how > complicated some SQLObject based models can be. I've worked on > projects with more than 10kloc of model and business logic code that > was all very tied to SQLObject. This made transitioning to SA a > multi-month project. > > So, for people who have such a thing I think the tgext.sqlobject work > outlined above would be far easier than moving directly to SA, since I > doubt there's more than a week worth of total effort involved. > > Daniel, I'm not so sure why you want it to be in the TG package core. > Is it just a desire for equality with SA that's driving it, or is > there some reason why having it in a separate module would somehow > cause trouble? I ask this because my strong preference would be to > have it in a separate package, so that it's very clear to new TG2 > users which ORM they should use.
Mark, the proposed tgext.sqlobject solution would be perfect. I really don't care if something is in the core or an extra package, all I care about is that it should work. I'm sorry, if my messages gave an impression that somehow being in the core is my main issue. > TG is a best of breed framework, and we need to make clear > recomendations where we can. But TG is also designed to be flexible, > so I'm all for adding support for SO, I just want to see it in a > seprate package. I realize that adding any form or shape of SO support to tg2 is extra work for the developers and I fully accept any answer, such as "it won't happen", "it might happen", "we don't know if it will happen", "it will happen in an external package", etc, etc. All I'm saying is that there exists at least one tg1/SO user who would be happy to see some form of SO support in tg2. Thanks a lot for all the great work on tg! Cheers, Daniel -- Psss, psss, put it down! - http://www.cafepress.com/putitdown --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
