Joachim Werner wrote:
> 
> > You know, it might be possible to get a team together to implement
> > this.  How many out there would be interested in pursuing it further?
> > IMHO it's not as much work as it sounds at first.  Zope being so
> > object-oriented, you really can replace one of its most fundamental
> > assumptions (an OODBMS) with something else (an RDBMS) without a huge
> > effort.
> 
> Do you know that there already is a project for OR-Mapping in Zope (actually
> there are two ...)?

Yes, and I think the projects need to look into replacing parts of ZODB
rather than adding complexity.  ZODB has pieces that can be split apart
and replaced as needed, such as caching, persistence, transactions, the
"pickle jar", the multi-threaded connection factory, and the storage
layer.  I'm hoping we can achieve OR mapping by only replacing the
"pickle jar", i.e. Connection.py.

> "Ours" is SmartObjects
> (http://demo.iuveno-net.de/iuveno/Products/SmartObjects). Also see the
> mailing list archive at
> http://imail.iuveno-net.de/pipermail/smartobjects/.

Kapil gave Jim and I a good introduction to SmartObjects yesterday.  So
far, it seems a lot like ZPatterns in that it mandates a new database
access API rather than trying to be transparent like ZODB.

> The other is TransWarp, which has a slightly different focus, but Phillip
> Eby is also on our list, so we won't duplicate efforts.

TransWarp doesn't try to be transparent either AFAICT...

Shane

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to