Hi Marcin, Thanks for taking the time to clarify constructively your use case.
On 23 Jun 2016, at 13:10, Marcin Nowak <marcin.j.no...@gmail.com> wrote: > If it will not use migration files when they already exists, it sounds ok. I believe that this point was a big misunderstanding in the discussion. As far as I understand, Andrew’s proposal works pretty much like Django’s former SQL generation tools, except it builds upon the robust abstractions that support the migrations system — specifically the schema editor class, which is really better at generating SQL that the pre-1.7 implementation. Since migrations are designed to perform schema changes, we have to ask "create the SQL to turn <nothing> into <current state of models>" instead of "create the SQL to generate <current state of models>". The result is the same, however: Django will introspect the current state of models, build an in-memory representation of them, and generate the corresponding SQL. This doesn’t require writing out migration files to disk. So, the only outstanding issue is to complete the patch that implements this feature :-) Best regards, -- Aymeric. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/4463F61A-8DDD-4F08-B0A9-23060768DF85%40polytechnique.org. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
