I've also seen a lot of demand for the multi-db support; however, I do
understand the time that this would take to get updated, stabilized,
and worked into trunk.  I have several apps I would like to work on
where I need to pull data from a couple legacy databases
(datawarehouse type dbs), but this proves difficult.  To this point,
I've been a little hesitant to run the multi-db branch, but I may have
to look at it and see how that works out.

If anyone who is capable puts time into getting the multi-db branch up
to par and added into trunk, I know many people would be very
thankful.

Thanks, Sean

On May 2, 12:22 am, Brian Luft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Russ,
>
> Thanks for the detailed response and I agree with all of your
> sentiments.  You're doing a great job and you are a tremendous asset
> to this list.  Keep up the great work.
>
> Having been a committer to other framework projects, I understand the
> constant pressure to integrate feature X,Y, and Z.  I'm totally on
> board with the direction the core devs are taking and have faith that
> the future will see some exciting new developments.
>
> I'm open to any or all solutions to this problem.  If I can use a
> compact pattern or drop in a metaclass somewhere that will enable this
> functionality then I can certainly live with that.   No need to put in
> man hours maintaining a branch if the solution is a simple tweak to an
> existing setup.
>
> You're right - "unfortunate" is a value judgement and I really meant
> it would be unfortunate if lack of a feature drove people away.  Of
> course that happens anyway (what no ajax support? what no clunky
> templating engine? i pass...) - you know the story.  It is very
> fortunate that we have a solid framework being driven by talented,
> dedicated people I can tell you that much :)
>
> Cheers
> -Brian
>
> On May 1, 9:37 pm, "Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > On 5/2/07, Brian Luft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Although I've successfully used the multi-db branch experimentally, it
> > > looks to be getting more and more out of date with the django trunk.
> > ...
> > > Just for the sake of lively discussion, I would go so far as to say
> > > that only being able to access a singledatabaseper project is an
> > > unfortunate limitation and could be a deal-breaker for those
> > > evaluating Django for their own use.  I'm sure there are many
>
> > ..
>
> > Limitation; sure. Unfortunate - that's a value judgement.
>
> > The recent Rails/Twitter kurfuffle demonstrates that multi-db support
> > can be very significant for a certain users. However, my time (and the
> > time of the other devs, for that matter) is very limited, and our own
> > itches will always take priority. I have many other features that I
> > want to see in Django before multi-db (aggregate clauses, schema
> > evolution, and model inheritance to name just 3). Multi-db just isn't
> > a priority for any of the ways that I use Django, so there isn't much
> > incentive for me to spend my time on it.
>
> > The fact that a branch exists demonstrates that the core devs are
> > willing to entertain the idea of multi-db as a feature. However, it
> > needs somebody to step up to the plate and finish the job. Ultimately,
> > this means submitting a branch in a condition suitable for merge back
> > into the trunk. What does this mean in practice?
>
> > - A branch that is up to date with trunk
> > - Evidence that the branch has been used by real users, and bugs have
> > been found and fixed
> > - The existence of test cases that integrate with existing test framework.
> > - Offering to look after the feature for the medium term.
>
> > Once you can convince the core devs that these conditions are met, you
> > should find the merge back happens pretty quickly - and voila!
> > multi-db in the trunk.
>
> > Now, before we are flooded with "give me SVN access and I'll do it!"
> > requests. We aren't going to give SVN access to just anybody that
> > stands up. We have been down this path, and so far, it seems to be the
> > single easiest way to make sure you never hear from someone ever again
> > (witness themultiplecontributors that have offered to finish
> > schema-evolution). Before you get SVN access, we want to see a track
> > record of contributing first.
>
> > Getting started doesn't require access to SVN. If you are interested
> > in multi-db, start working and submit patches. If you demonstrate that
> > you are in for the long haul, you will get SVN access for that branch
> > to make your life a little easier.
>
> > So - if you want multi-db (or any other feature, for that matter), have at 
> > it!
>
> > Yours,
> > Russ Magee %-)


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to