Michael Bayer wrote: > two things are needed: > > 1. the "official" way to create a Session when all you want is a > Session, with no custom builder class or anything like that. It > should not be grossly inconsistent with the default arguments of the > current sessionmaker() call. > > 2. all the myriad "create_session()" calls in the unit tests need to > call something that acts like the old "create_session()", i.e. with > all the newfangled things turned off by default. > > > My vote would be for 1. just call Session(), and 2. we just put a > "create_session()" function in the testlib.
So creating the Session class directly is the right way to go? I switched from using that to create_session when I found out about the existence of this function, but I can switch back. Note that I really need to create sessions themselves; I cannot use sessionmaker nor scoped_session, as I have a special scoped session that needs to be able to create sessions. Regards, Martijn --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
