On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 1:28 PM, DaNmarner <danmar...@gmail.com> wrote: > First of all: my native language is not English, so I apologize for > any potential natural language error (or any error at all) below. > > After (briefly) reading through the current implementaion as well as > the "Issues to consider" section in the GSoC2011 page on wiki, my > initial observation is that the current code structure/abstraction is > almost good enough to cater all the "Issues" on the wiki if The need > for "Serializing non-database attributes/properties" is not considered > for now. ... > I feel like I'm still missing a lot to consider. I'm aware of the old > proposals in the past and I'm planning to digest those as soon as > possible. But I really want to hear thoughts about my idea from > y'all. So please, tell me what's wrong in it.
It feels like that to me, too. My initial reaction here is that you need to do a *lot* more research -- in particular looking into the types of problems that we're trying to solve. In addition to reading the many past discussions and tickets, there is another GSoC serialization proposal kicking around at the moment -- that proposal is much closer to the mark. If you want to pursue this project, I suggest you take a look at it. Alternatively, you've come up with a magnificent solution that nobody has considered, but you haven't described it clearly enough that we can understand what you're proposing. Either way, this proposal needs a lot more work before we can provide any serious feedback. Yours, Russ Magee %-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
