On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Brit Butler <[email protected]> wrote: > Scott, > >> So the postmodern backend has a similar problem? > > The postmodern code is indeed new and not ready for real use until > this issue is resolved. I'm hoping to take a look at it over the next > few days. The plan is to add store-thread-setup, store-thread-teardown > and use-thread-hooks-p generics to the Store API which get called in > handle-client-request. I'll post to the list when I have a first pass > at the patch. Hopefully that will be before Monday.
Ah, okay. Sounds like we're duplicating some effort -- you might want to take a look at the patch I included in a previous message in this thread. -- Scott > > On Dec 23, 2:20 pm, "Scott L. Burson" <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 11:43 PM, Leslie P. Polzer >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Dec 23, 8:34 am, Scott Burson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> Hmm, okay. It seems to be sufficient to allow me to begin developing >> >> my app, which solves my immediate problem. >> >> > We can solve any problems that come up with your approach as you go >> > along. I like your solution because it ties in neatly with what we've >> > planned for the new Postmodern store. >> >> So the Postmodern backend has a similar problem? I'm wondering if I >> should be trying to use Postmodern instead of CLSQL -- but my very >> superficial impression, when I looked at both of them, was that CLSQL >> looked more mature and fully-featured. Postmodern is an option, >> though, because I'm using Postgres anyway. The CLSQL query syntax >> does look a bit weird, but I don't know if Postmodern's is really that >> much of an improvement. >> >> > The problem is in the CLSQL code, and we should strive to fix it in >> > their code and submit a patch against the official repository or at >> > worst devise our own hack for it if that isn't feasible for some >> > reason. >> >> Well, of course, Stephen already tried submitting a patch once. >> That's why I'm wondering how much effort was put into persuading Kevin >> to accept it. >> >> -- Scott > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "weblocks" 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/weblocks?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "weblocks" 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/weblocks?hl=en.
