I'm only lightly involved in the project, but there is some misinformation going around about it.
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Daniel Greenfeld <pyda...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > We evaluated django-nonrel for use in projects and looked again at > django-nonrel for our talk at DjangoCon Europe. To summarize our > findings and opinions: > > 1. django-nonrel is stuck on Django 1.3, which has some security > implications. > 1.4 support is implemented and being tested in a beta mode right now. > 2. django-nonrel is unsupported. It switched maintainers and the > current maintainer is not working on it. > Django-nonrel is very much maintained. Look at the github https://github.com/django-nonrel/ > 3. [pydanny opinion warning] django-nonrel wasn't adopted in Django > core because it lacked adequate documentation and tests. > This is true. > 4. [pydanny opinion warning] django-nonrel treats MongoDB as a > relational store, which it most certainly is not. > The idea is to use the same ORM as you would any other DB, so yes the ORM does make some assumptions. Though you get Dict/ListFields, Embedded Models, etc. > 5. [pydanny opinion warning] django-nonrel smells like a giant hack > done by very well intentioned people.. > I have to agree with you here. The nature of the Django ORM makes anything like this a hack. Not much choice in that regard. I've wondered if it's possible to make an ORM that API compatible with forms/admin/etc that doesn't hack onto the existing ORM? > > Hope that helps, > > -- > 'Knowledge is Power' > Daniel Greenfeld > http://pydanny.com -- 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.
