Hi there, On 5/29/06, Jorge Vargas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > great! try to contact the people working on it.
I was kinda hoping they were here :o) -- from Trac it seems you, Godoy, jvanasco and jeff might be the culprits. :o) The current TG code relies on the thread-local behaviour (i.e. using the sqlalchemy.objectstore namespace). This is available in 0.2 but only through an extension. The preferred way in 0.2 is letting the user handle this via explicit creation and flushing of Session objects. Now, the question is, should we create a session at the start of the request and store it in some globally accessible variable and flush it on completion of the request, or should we leave it up to the user to create her own sessions? The former is more like they way TG does it today with 0.1, and more like the SQLObject way. However, I would personally prefer the latter, since it gives the programmer more control over sessions and transaction stuff. He might want to open sessions to multiple engines, create several independed transactions etc. all within the scope of one CP request. To me, the latter also seems more in tune with SQLAlchemy 0.2. Whaty do you think? Arnar --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
