FAQ
With so many object relational mappers out there, I wonder which one is
the preferred tool among the Pythonists... is there a favourite?

Sqlobject, PyDO, SQLAlchemy, dejavu, etc...

Search Discussions

  • Serge Orlov at Mar 20, 2006 at 1:52 am

    Flavio wrote:
    With so many object relational mappers out there, I wonder which one is
    the preferred tool among the Pythonists... is there a favourite?

    Sqlobject, PyDO, SQLAlchemy, dejavu, etc...
    Google results:
    Sqlobject ORM: about 17,100
    PyDO ORM: 469
    SQLAlchemy ORM: 571
    dejavu ORM: 659
  • Jean-Paul Calderone at Mar 20, 2006 at 2:39 am

    On 19 Mar 2006 17:52:19 -0800, Serge Orlov wrote:
    Flavio wrote:
    With so many object relational mappers out there, I wonder which one is
    the preferred tool among the Pythonists... is there a favourite?

    Sqlobject, PyDO, SQLAlchemy, dejavu, etc...
    Google results:
    Sqlobject ORM: about 17,100
    PyDO ORM: 469
    SQLAlchemy ORM: 571
    dejavu ORM: 659
    axiom orm: about 21,500

    Although "axiom" is not exactly unique. How about:

    divmod axiom: 34,500

    Huh.

    Jean-Paul
  • Serge Orlov at Mar 20, 2006 at 3:33 am

    Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
    On 19 Mar 2006 17:52:19 -0800, Serge Orlov wrote:
    Flavio wrote:
    With so many object relational mappers out there, I wonder which one is
    the preferred tool among the Pythonists... is there a favourite?

    Sqlobject, PyDO, SQLAlchemy, dejavu, etc...
    Google results:
    Sqlobject ORM: about 17,100
    PyDO ORM: 469
    SQLAlchemy ORM: 571
    dejavu ORM: 659
    axiom orm: about 21,500

    Although "axiom" is not exactly unique. How about:

    divmod axiom: 34,500

    Huh.
    +axiom +python +ORM: 724
    +dejavu +python +ORM: 529
  • Jonathan Ellis at Mar 20, 2006 at 6:12 am

    Serge Orlov wrote:
    Flavio wrote:
    With so many object relational mappers out there, I wonder which one is
    the preferred tool among the Pythonists... is there a favourite?

    Sqlobject, PyDO, SQLAlchemy, dejavu, etc...
    Google results:
    Sqlobject ORM: about 17,100
    PyDO ORM: 469
    SQLAlchemy ORM: 571
    dejavu ORM: 659
    ... which, of course, goes to show how stupid a metric this is, now
    that even Ian Bicking has admitted that SqlObject in its current form
    is a dead end.

    Personally, I think SqlAlchemy has the brightest future. It's
    significantly more sophisticated than the others, and it's already
    quite usable and even stable (if the 0.1.3 to 0.1.4 transition is any
    indication), although I think technically still alpha.

    -Jonathan
  • Giovanni Bajo at Mar 20, 2006 at 8:18 am

    Jonathan Ellis wrote:

    ... which, of course, goes to show how stupid a metric this is, now
    that even Ian Bicking has admitted that SqlObject in its current form
    is a dead end.

    Got a pointer?
    --
    Giovanni Bajo
  • Jonathan Ellis at Mar 20, 2006 at 4:47 pm

    Giovanni Bajo wrote:
    Jonathan Ellis wrote:
    ... which, of course, goes to show how stupid a metric this is, now
    that even Ian Bicking has admitted that SqlObject in its current form
    is a dead end.

    Got a pointer?
    http://blog.ianbicking.org/sqlobject-2.html
  • Steve Holden at Mar 20, 2006 at 5:12 pm

    Jonathan Ellis wrote:
    Giovanni Bajo wrote:
    Jonathan Ellis wrote:

    ... which, of course, goes to show how stupid a metric this is, now
    that even Ian Bicking has admitted that SqlObject in its current form
    is a dead end.

    Got a pointer?

    http://blog.ianbicking.org/sqlobject-2.html
    I think describing this as Ian saying the code in its current form "is a
    dead end" is to read rather more into the words than is actually there.
    I spoke to Ian, because he made the blog entry the same day as I was
    using SQLObject as an ORM exemplar in my "Using Databases in Python"
    tutorial, and I wanted a few words of reassurance.

    You will find as SQLObject 2 appears that it's more of a refactoring
    than a complete revision. I suspect the maintenance of the code had
    become tedious because it had slowly morphed into a less-than-ideal form
    for its fully-developed functionality.

    regards
    Steve
    --
    Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119
    Holden Web LLC/Ltd www.holdenweb.com
    Love me, love my blog holdenweb.blogspot.com
  • Jonathan Ellis at Mar 20, 2006 at 6:21 pm

    Steve Holden wrote:
    I think describing this as Ian saying the code in its current form "is a
    dead end" is to read rather more into the words than is actually there.
    Well, that may be. However, given that the 0.x code is so crufty that
    the v2 "refactor" is a multi-day (-week, now) process that merits a new
    project name, and there are enough architecture warts that it's not
    worth it to keep v2 backwards compatible, I'm not sure what
    requirements of being a dead end are missing here. :)

    I suppose that in one sense no OSS project is a dead end since you can
    always pick up the pieces yourself, but it's clear the 0.x series is
    not a place to expect much in the way of new developments from its
    author.

    -Jonathan
  • Steve Holden at Mar 21, 2006 at 9:30 am

    Jonathan Ellis wrote:
    Steve Holden wrote:
    I think describing this as Ian saying the code in its current form "is a
    dead end" is to read rather more into the words than is actually there.

    Well, that may be. However, given that the 0.x code is so crufty that
    the v2 "refactor" is a multi-day (-week, now) process that merits a new
    project name, and there are enough architecture warts that it's not
    worth it to keep v2 backwards compatible, I'm not sure what
    requirements of being a dead end are missing here. :)

    I suppose that in one sense no OSS project is a dead end since you can
    always pick up the pieces yourself, but it's clear the 0.x series is
    not a place to expect much in the way of new developments from its
    author.
    Sure, we can agree on that. I though you meant to imply that Ian was
    abandoning the concepts behind SQLObject rather that the somewhat crufty
    initial implementation.

    regards
    Steve
    --
    Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119
    Holden Web LLC/Ltd www.holdenweb.com
    Love me, love my blog holdenweb.blogspot.com

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
grouppython-list @
categoriespython
postedMar 19, '06 at 8:54p
activeMar 21, '06 at 9:30a
posts10
users6
websitepython.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase