Ulysses Almeida wrote: > In example, since june I alredy saw TG switch the > focus from SqlObject to SqlAlchemy and from Kid to Genshi. Ok, new > technology are always cool, but if we change focus every time we see a > new technology we will never have a "so waited" 1.0 version. We will > be always throwing docs away and releasing inconsistent books (and I > think the most of us prefer to write codes than docs, so trhow docs > away really hurts). What I mean (and want to propose) is: Let's get a > focus and finalize it. And to guarantee it, some one will need to do > the BDFL hard work (Kevin?).
It is true what you say, however, IMHO, if SA is really better than SO, it would behoove us to adopt it sooner rather than later due to the 'legacy' effect. The longer something is out there (higher version number) the harder it is to be 'agile' and change tack. I am a recent Java-to-Python convert and am looking very seriously at TG for some major projects. But I have found SqlObject to have very poor documentation. I would volunteer to write it but I'm not really a DB/ORM expert having only used Hibernate/EJB-3.0 for a few years with mysql. I don't really have that kind of time either. Long and short: Go with SA if it looks robust and has good docs. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
