On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 10:21 PM, Waldemar Kornewald <wkornew...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Russell Keith-Magee > <russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Waldemar Kornewald >> <wkornew...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> As Alex' MongoDB backend demonstrates, all nonrel backends can >>> retrieve the Query's filters. >> >> No - Alex's MongoDB backend demonstrates that the basic query >> requirements of MongoDB can be met. > > MongoDB is basically a superset of the other DBs. That's why we chose > it for GSoC. Cassandra can only do pk queries. So can MongoDB. App > Engine has filtering support. So has MongoDB. CouchDB supports > embedded documents. So does MongoDB. > > Of course some DBs have extra features like map/reduce or optimistic > locking, but those can't be mapped to Django's current ORM, anyway, so > they need platform-specific APIs. > > What you're expecting here (4 backends!) is a *lot*. Who will write > those backends? If that's what you want then the merge might have to > wait for Django 1.5 or later.
I'm not saying that 4 *finished* backends is a pre-requisite for merging to trunk. What I'm saying is that 4 *proof of concept* backends would be enough to satisfy me that enough people have looked at the API we're proposing in sufficient detail to validate that it's sufficient for the task. The backends themselves aren't the important feature in all this. The important features are: * the eyeballs that come along for the ride -- preferably, several pairs of them, with in-depth knowledge and experience in the various platforms we're looking to service with these changes; and * the hard evidence that they've actually looked into the problem, not just glanced at the API and assumed that everything will work the way it needs to. > What's the problem with just trusting > the people who know this stuff instead of forcing everyone to > demonstrate it with working products? The problem here is your use of the word "people". You make it sound like I'm ignoring a group of people providing consistent advice. So far, *you* are the only person who has said that the proposed API is good for all purposes. That's valuable counsel to be sure, but you'll forgive me if I wait until I get the same feedback from others. Yours, Russ Magee %-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
