Can we have a little discussion on pros/cons of this? Does this make
mod_python dependent on sqlite?
Thanks,
Grisha
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: nlehuen
Date: Tue Sep 20 14:28:32 2005
New Revision: 290569
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=290569&view=rev
Log:
>Can we have a little discussion on pros/cons of this? Does this make
>mod_python dependent on sqlite?
Nope. It'll just silently fail if it can't import dbapi2.
Rob
>> +try:
>> +# If this code is included into Session.py,
>> +# we don't want to add a dependency to SQLite
>> +from p
OK, my next question would be - is MySQL, PostgreSQL, Informix, Oracle,
etc next, and is this the path we want to take, or is there something
about sqlite that makes it unique?
Grisha
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Robert Sanderson wrote:
Can we have a little discussion on pros/cons of this? Does
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
OK, my next question would be - is MySQL, PostgreSQL, Informix, Oracle,
etc next,
Yes. ;)
and is this the path we want to take, or is there something
about sqlite that makes it unique?
I don't know if it is that path we *want* to take, but I think the
Grisha,
Your message implies that there is a mailing list for mod_python svn
commit messages. How can I subscribe to this?
Thanks,
Jim
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
Can we have a little discussion on pros/cons of this? Does this make
mod_python dependent on sqlite?
Thanks,
Grisha
it's [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Jim Gallacher wrote:
Grisha,
Your message implies that there is a mailing list for mod_python svn commit
messages. How can I subscribe to this?
Thanks,
Jim
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
Can we have a little discussion on pros/cons of this
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Jim Gallacher wrote:
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
OK, my next question would be - is MySQL, PostgreSQL, Informix, Oracle,
etc next,
Yes. ;)
And how did we arrive at this decision? :-)
I'd be pretty strongly -1 on this, as it's got little to do with
Apache/Py
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Jim Gallacher wrote:
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
OK, my next question would be - is MySQL, PostgreSQL, Informix,
Oracle, etc next,
Yes. ;)
And how did we arrive at this decision? :-)
Oh, there was no decision. It's jus
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
I think it might be interesting to see something like an ANSI SQL-92
compatible session with some suggestions on how it can be easily
integrated with your database vendor of choice, but deifinitely not
support specific database vendors, except for those whose
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Jim Gallacher wrote:
On another note, if we are starting to roll with new features for 3.3
I would suggest we need to immediately create a new svn branch for 3.2
bugfixes.
Yes
Any preference for a branch name? Some suggestions:
bran
Hi all,
I'm sorry to have launched such a heated discussion. I was
experimenting with a SQLite implementation of sessions, and got
something functional enough that I wanted to archive it so that we
could come back to it later... I don't want it to distract us from the
3.2 release :).
That being s
11 matches
Mail list logo
