Felix Schwarz wrote:
> Alberto Valverde schrieb:
>> Today's midterm evaluation day so I cooked up a demo of the work I've
>> done so far:
>>
>> http://rumdemo.toscawidgets.org/
>
> Sorry to ask these newbie-ish question here but what is the difference
> of your project to dbsmechanic/dbsprockets?
The biggest difference is that I need Rum to support *model* objects
(with inheritance, properties, etc...) instead of  database tables.
I found dbsprockets API too table-oriented to extend in the ways I need.
Rum also makes heavy use of PEAK-Rules internally since I find it
simplifies much the introspection we both need to do.
> Is there any overlap?
Yes, they both handle CRUD operations but the internal abstractions are
quite different.
> Can you share code?
Sure, http://toscawidgets.org/hg/rum. Take all you want, it's free ;)
> Am I stupid and both projects do not have anything in common?
The final goal is very similar (automate as much as possible the tedious
CRUD interfaces we've written over and over again) but the
implementation and abstractions it manages are quite different (better
read the source).
I believe Rum will be easier to extend to handle other data backends
such as ZODB because it doesn't think in terms of tables but in terms of
objects.

Finally, I want Rum to be usable in TG2, Pylons etc... but not depend on
them since I've bet my chances that I'll end up writing more code in the
form of framework adapters than in the form of a very basic and very
specifically tailored WSGI framework to provide the little services I
need (BTW, this is all thanks to paste, webob, and the rest of pylons
building blocks)

Alberto

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

Reply via email to