Re: Proposal: use SQLAlchemy Core for query generation

On Wednesday, December 26, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > That depends entirely on what you consider the goal of the ORM to be. > > You have assumed that the goal would be "allow an arbitrary query to run on > any underlying data store, and run with equivalent efficiency". In

Re: Proposal: use SQLAlchemy Core for query generation

On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Donald Stufft wrote: > On Wednesday, December 26, 2012 at 10:00 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > > Why? Because we've gone to extraordinary lengths to make sure this sort of > thing is at least theoretically possible. > > Although we use

Re: Proposal: use SQLAlchemy Core for query generation

On Wednesday, December 26, 2012 at 10:00 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > Why? Because we've gone to extraordinary lengths to make sure this sort of > thing is at least theoretically possible. > > Although we use the term "ORM", and there's currently only relational > implementations of

Re: Proposal: use SQLAlchemy Core for query generation

On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Donald Stufft wrote: > On Sunday, December 23, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Florent Gallaire wrote: > > Django ORM should work for SQL and NoSQL DBMS. > NoSQL integration in Django is a more interesting and needed subject, > but who cares about that

Re: Django 1.5 release plans

2012/9/11 Jacob Kaplan-Moss > > Oct 1: Feature freeze, Django 1.5 alpha. > Nov 1: Django 1.5 beta. > Nov 26: Django 1.5 RC 1 > Dec 10: Django 1.5 RC 2 > Dec 17: Django 1.5 RC 3, if needed > Dec 24 (or earlier): Django 1.5 final > > (All dates are "week of" - we'll do the