[Zope-dev] Re: Zope3 on Google AppEngine

[David Pratt]

Hi Malthe. Kapil has confirmed the licensing is ZPL with a version bump 
to 0.5.2 with a change in the headers, etc. I am anxious to experiment 
with dobbin since it looks so straight forward and nice. I guess I see 
traversal and containers as possible issues but will be interested in 
potential solutions. Trails for grok is one possible solution for 
traversal but will be curious to see approaches for replacing containers.

Regards
David

David Pratt wrote:
> Hi Malthe. Perhaps I am wrong about the licensing situation. I guess its 
> a bit confusing since pypi indicates GPL and package ZPL. I guess I 
> should contact Kapil for clarification if I am interested in 
> experimenting here. Many thanks.
> 
> Regards,
> David
> 
>     name="ore.alchemist",
>     version="0.5.1",
>     url="http://code.google.com/p/zope-alchemist",
>     install_requires=['setuptools', 'transaction'],
>     packages=find_packages('src', exclude=["*.tests"]),
>     package_dir= {'':'src'},
>     namespace_packages=['ore'],
>     package_data = {
>     '': ['*.txt', '*.zcml', '*.pt'],
>     },
>     zip_safe=False,
>     author='Kapil Thangavelu',
>     author_email='kapil.foss at gmail.com',
>     description="""\
> ore.alchemist contains an integration of sqlalchemy into the
> Zope App server environment. It can be used with Zope2, Zope3 or
> standalone.
> """,
>     license='ZPL',
>     keywords="zope zope3",
>     )
> 
> Malthe Borch wrote:
>> David Pratt wrote:
>>> Hi Malthe. z3c.dobbin looks quite good and transparent. In my 
>>> opinion, this is much closer to what integration ought to look like 
>>> for CA. BTW, I noticed that z3c.dobbin is zpl but ore.alchemist that 
>>> it depends on is gpl. I think all the other zope flavors of 
>>> sqlalchemy are under zpl. I believe there was a recent effort to 
>>> bring the sqlalchemy flavors together under a single package. Not 
>>> sure what progress has been made.
>>
>> It's progressing, but we've also talked to Kapil about relicensing 
>> ore.alchemist to LGPL or ZPL, whichever is enough.
>>
>>> In any case, this direction looks like a good one. It would be 
>>> interesting if dobbin could map for storm but it appears to rely 
>>> heavily upon ore.alchemist.
>>
>> I think it's more accurate to say that both rely heavily on 
>> SQLAlchemy. We're actually not using the table reflection 
>> functionality of ore.alchemist because we've taken a different 
>> approach to it (joining on minimal interfaces rather than mapping 
>> classes to tables). What we are using is some of the zope.schema to 
>> sqlalchemy.Column mappings and the database session environment.
>>
>>> I believe storms advantage is that it is faster than sqlalchemy since 
>>> it doesn't have to worry about pooling connections, mappers, and 
>>> more.  I'd be interesting to see a similar approach with storm. Good 
>>> job on this.
>>
>> Thanks, I think we might've found a good approach. Currently we're 
>> test-driving it in the Vudo project. So far so good.
>>
>> I don't know much about storm; at this point I must say that I care 
>> more about ease of use, mindshare and stability than just speed; we 
>> feel that SQLAlchemy gives us that. Add to it that their community is 
>> absolutely great.
>>
>> \malthe
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev at zope.org
>> http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
>> **  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
>> (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
>> http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev at zope.org
> http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
> **  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
> (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
> http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
>