On 06/26/2012 11:07 PM, Adam "Cezar" Jenkins wrote:
Last I heard Jonas wanted to do a new release of mongodb-engine. He might
have meant to say he was not maintaining the project anymore, but he's not
the only one with commit access.
The main thing is that I've lost interest in maintaining this
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Chris Northwood wrote:
>
> Surely that's what it needs though, an 'ORM' and an 'Object-Document
> Mapper' at some point. What's the advantage of trying to shoehorn
> MongoDB to work with an ORM, when it's not relational, and as it has
> to be hidden behind the same
On Jun 27, 2012 7:12 AM, "Chris Northwood" wrote:
>
> On 26 June 2012 22:07, Adam "Cezar" Jenkins
wrote:
>
> > I have to agree, that's the big one. Though I the ecosystem of 3rd party
> > apps is what makes using Django so great. If there is one ORM for 99%
of
> > the apps out there, and only on
On 26 June 2012 22:07, Adam "Cezar" Jenkins wrote:
> I have to agree, that's the big one. Though I the ecosystem of 3rd party
> apps is what makes using Django so great. If there is one ORM for 99% of
> the apps out there, and only one that works Mongo, then the only real use
> case of Django is
Note that I've talked about the issues that nonrel has, and there are many.
That said, I have some responses below. I'm not trying to be the nonrel
spokesperson.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 3:34 PM, Daniel Greenfeld wrote:
>
> I don't mean to pick bones, but looking at the github account, BETA
> app
On Sunday, June 24, 2012 10:31:41 PM UTC+8, Cezar Jenkins wrote:
>
> 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
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> We evaluated django-nonrel for use in projects and
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Russell Keith-Magee <
russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:31 PM, Adam "Cezar" Jenkins
> wrote:
>
> There's an extent to which "Does Django support non-rel" is really
> just asking "Can I use the admin and Django Forms with non-rel"; so
> r
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:31 PM, Adam "Cezar" Jenkins
wrote:
> 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 wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> We evaluated django-nonrel for use in projects and looked ag
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 wrote:
>
>
> We evaluated django-nonrel for use in projects and looked again at
> django-nonrel for our talk at DjangoCon Europe. To summarize our
>
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for giving some feedback on this.
I completely agree that one of its biggest downfalls is that it tries to
treat MongoDB as a relational store, and I think this is what I meant by it
just didn't "feel right".
Also +1 on the comments made about it feeling hacky, and I suspect th
Hi Andres,
Afaik, there's currently some compatibility issues with Django 1.4 - so
it's not currently stable.
Also, in my own personal opinion - after having a chance to use the mongo
models with Django, in my personal opinion, it just didn't "feel right".
Not entirely sure how to explain what th
Hey All,
I've been trying to use django with mongo and it seems like django-nonrel
is still the best option out there. The only sad fact is that it's still
not part of the official django. Looking for an answer as to why that was
the case, I came across this thread. Are tests and docs all that
On Sun 08 Jan 2012 05:39:02 PM CET, Emil Stenström wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2011 10:31:39 PM UTC+1, jo...@lophus.org wrote:
1.) I didn't write the code, I'm just submitting the patches in their
current state
Jonas: Do you have information on who wrote the code that you submitted? I
g
On Thursday, December 8, 2011 10:31:39 PM UTC+1, jo...@lophus.org wrote:
>
> 1.) I didn't write the code, I'm just submitting the patches in their
> current state
>
Jonas: Do you have information on who wrote the code that you submitted? I
guess a good way forward would be to find those people,
On Dec 12, 4:46 pm, Karen Tracey wrote:>
>
> This SELECT:
>
> > {'sql': u'SELECT "vortaro_car"."id", "vortaro_car"."name",
> > "vortaro_car"."owner_id" FROM "vortaro_car" WHERE
> > "vortaro_car"."owner_id" IN (1)',
> > 'time': '0.001'},
> > {'sql': u'DELETE FROM "vortaro_car" WHERE "id" IN (1)'
On Dec 12, 4:53 pm, Wilfred Hughes wrote:
> > [Django] is (sort of) _emulating_ SQL cascading deletes, but it does so in
> > a way that doesn't assume anything at all from the backend.
>
> I'm not sure this is correct. If I define the following models:
> In [1]: from vortaro.models import Pers
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Wilfred Hughes wrote:
> Following up on #17338 ([nonrel] supports_deleting_related_objects
> database feature flag):
>
> carljm said that:
>
> > [Django] is (sort of) _emulating_ SQL cascading deletes, but it does so
> in a way that doesn't assume anything at all f
Following up on #17338 ([nonrel] supports_deleting_related_objects
database feature flag):
carljm said that:
> [Django] is (sort of) _emulating_ SQL cascading deletes, but it does so in a
> way that doesn't assume anything at all from the backend.
I'm not sure this is correct. If I define the f
On 09.12.2011, at 01:37, Jonas H. wrote:
> On 12/08/2011 11:39 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Jonas H. wrote:
>>> 2.) I don't like wasting my time, so I won't write extensive documentation
>>> before the patch gets accepted
>>
>> I'm sorry, but that's just not h
On 12/08/2011 11:39 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Jonas H. wrote:
2.) I don't like wasting my time, so I won't write extensive documentation
before the patch gets accepted
I'm sorry, but that's just not how we do things around here.
Documentation isn't an aftert
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mmm, this reads to me like a bit of a mis-understanding. Hinges on what
Jonas means by "before the patch gets accepted." The phrase is slightly
confusing because we have an Accepted state in Trac, but that applies to
tickets, in concept, not to specifi
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Jonas H. wrote:
> 2.) I don't like wasting my time, so I won't write extensive documentation
> before the patch gets accepted
I'm sorry, but that's just not how we do things around here.
Documentation isn't an afterthought; is as important -- more even --
then the
On 12/07/2011 09:53 PM, Aymeric Augustin wrote:
I just came across your patches while I was triaging the "unreviewed" queue.
Unfortunately, I found it difficult to assess them, since they don't include tests or
docs.
Generally, all changes should come with tests. If you're adding new features
On 3 déc. 2011, at 23:36, Jonas H. wrote:
> On Jacob's suggestion in this thread [1] back in April, I split the diff
> between Django trunk and Django-nonrel into logically separated patches.
>
> I uploaded most of them to the ticket tracker (a few things are still missing
> but these are the mo
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Jonas H. wrote:
> On Jacob's suggestion in this thread [1] back in April, I split the diff
> between Django trunk and Django-nonrel into logically separated patches.
>
> I uploaded most of them to the ticket tracker (a few things are still
> missing but these are th
Hello list!
On Jacob's suggestion in this thread [1] back in April, I split the diff
between Django trunk and Django-nonrel into logically separated patches.
I uploaded most of them to the ticket tracker (a few things are still
missing but these are the most important changes):
https://code
26 matches
Mail list logo
