Re: [SQLObject] Looking towards 0.5

[Brad B. <br...@bb...>]

On 05/22/03 11:04, Brad Bollenbach wrote:
> On 05/22/03 10:18, Luke Opperman wrote:
> > To start a separate thread, I'd like to open up discussion for what new things
> > people are working on or considering for 0.5 (since 0.4 will be mostly a
> > maintenance release, as I count it new features are just improved createSQL
> > stuff and changes to Col to allow SQLObject inheritance to work properly.)
> > 
> > My thoughts for post-0.4:
> > 
> > * MemoryTransaction or an equivalent.
> > 
> > * Some decision on concurrency control/resolution (should SQLObject offer any,
> > and if so then let's do it.)
> > 
> > * Actual enforcement of a constraints/validators system, at least providing
> > toSQL/toPython functionality. (Ian, I know you've been busy on FormEncode, and
> > that will be a help here :)
> > 
> > That's all I've got for now.
> 
> The framework needs a solid test suite. I can see there are some bugs
> that have crept into SQLObject that would probably never have been
> there in the first place with test-driven development (e.g. dropTable
> not dropping sequences for PostgreSQL backends).
> 
> I've been insanely busy with work and talks in the past few weeks
> (spent six hours on the road last night going to and returning from
> giving a talk to the Brandon Unix User group!), am moving to Quebec
> City on May 30, and have to prepare for the EuroPython talk late next
> month about SQLObject.
> 
> But I'm definitely interested in retrofitting a test suite onto the
> framework (basically by writing unit tests against the documented API)
> and hope that future SQLObject contributions will submit unit tests
> with their code.

Just updated from CVS, and I can see that tests/test.py is
growing. Cool. :)

-- 
Brad Bollenbach
BBnet.ca