Hi Malthe. z3c.dobbin looks quite good and transparent. In my opinion, this is much closer to what integration ought to look like for CA. BTW, I noticed that z3c.dobbin is zpl but ore.alchemist that it depends on is gpl. I think all the other zope flavors of sqlalchemy are under zpl. I believe there was a recent effort to bring the sqlalchemy flavors together under a single package. Not sure what progress has been made.

In any case, this direction looks like a good one. It would be interesting if dobbin could map for storm but it appears to rely heavily upon ore.alchemist. I believe storms advantage is that it is faster than sqlalchemy since it doesn't have to worry about pooling connections, mappers, and more. I'd be interesting to see a similar approach with storm. Good job on this.


Regards,
David

Malthe Borch wrote:
David Pratt wrote:
Hi Jodok. I had looked at storm a while back but the zope integration seemed to lack any relationship with zope schemas. I guess it is possible to define a zope schema that is not persisted and create the tables from it. It did not seem to me a good way of using CA. How are you managing this part of things.

fwiw, ore.alchemist and now z3c.dobbin integrates zope.interface and zope.schema with sqlalchemy, each taking a quite different approach.

\malthe

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


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

Reply via email to