Mario Ruggier wrote: > Hi Patrick, > > nice idea, and thanks for suggesting it. I have not had the opportunity > to look closely at Schevo, i.e. use it, and I became aware of it only > when it was pointed out here around pycon time. I was already planning > to package a first release of moellus at that time. > > Schevo is certainly interesting, and definitely more "ambitious"... > implementing rigourously the idea of an object model, plus accomodating > several back-ends, multi-editing tools, and so on. As you say, if I > were to take moellus that route, it would probably be a better idea to > take on Schevo instead. For me moellus was simply a means to simplify > usage of durus. And I have no intention of taking it much further. I > mention port to zodb below only in the spirit of "genericity", asking > what if? I really never had the intention to add zodb support to > moellus, and still don't... for using zodb there is a lot more > knowledge out there, than for using durus, and I would have looked at > how people use zodb first. Watch out! A predecessor to Schevo was bdoz (bulldozer), an attempt to merely make ZODB easier to use. ;-) > The driver behind moellus is the application I am working on... and the > features have evolved to meet those needs. A basic stumbler would > therefore be to port the application to another db layer. For new > project opportunities, Schevo is certainly on the my list of tools to > be considered. I completely understand. And Schevo itself has been developed to meet the needs of current projects. > I am not even familiar enough with Schevo to be able to compare > features... there is obviously some overlap, but i suspect they are > very different animals, and probably there are problems that may be > better addressed by one or the other. Just as there is good > justification for a db like Durus, when ZODB exists... or for Quixote > for that matter. If there is one problem with Python, it is this, that > it is so easy to implement things yourself! Anyhow, I am very attracted > by small light-weight designs, and my intention is to keep moellus as > light as possible. I think there may be more overlap than you seem to think. After all, we are both implementing relational features on top of object databases. And our current rewrite of Schevo is much smaller and lighter than the previous version. > But, really, I think it is silly, if flattering, to compare these two > frameworks... I don't know too many people trying to do what we are doing, and hate to see a dilution of effort. On the other hand, I understand the desire to do your own thing. Mostly I just wanted to make sure you were aware of Schevo in case you hadn't heard of it. Good luck with moellus. Let me know if you ever have the time to take a look at Schevo. It would be interesting to hear your perspective. -- Patrick K. O'Brien Orbtech http://www.orbtech.com Schevo http://www.schevo.org Pypersyst http://www.pypersyst.org