[storm] Storm presentation at Python user group

[Duncan McGreggor]

On Feb 19, 2008 4:50 PM, Michael Bayer <mike_mp at zzzcomputing.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 19, 2008, at 4:57 PM, Duncan McGreggor wrote:
>
> > On Feb 19, 2008 3:56 PM, Duncan McGreggor
> > <duncan.mcgreggor at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I like storm for the API. It's simple and it makes sense. It doesn't
> >> try to do too much for me either. To be fair, I also like SQLAlchemy
> >> for the API, but that's because other ORMs just didn't fit my brain
> >> and SQLAlchemy was the closest I could get.
> >
> > Oops -- my apologies to the SQLAlchemy team, but that was supposed to
> > be past tense "liked SQLAlchemy" not present tense.
>
>
> but we're talking about the API as of late version 0.2, correct ?

If I recall, it was 0.1. I haven't used SA since late 2005/early 2006.

> A typical Storm ORM conversation
> looks pretty similar to a SQLAlchemy ORM conversation (and this was
> widely observed when Storm was first announced).

I have spent more time in Divmod's Axiom (not an ORM, but an object db
built on sqlite) than SA, so I notice those similarities more than any
others.

> In my Pycon presentation I'll be covering how SA 0.2 was an extremely
> abrupt transition from 0.1 which made for a fragile API and codebase
> at that time, why the change was necessary, and how we went about
> becoming a more usable and reliable tool by the late 0.3 series.

Yeah, I got caught in the unenviable position with a client (KCRW in
LA) where I implemented a solution using 0.1 and they didn't have the
funds to lay down for the upgrade to 0.2, so they got stuck with a SA
0.1 fork with back-ported fixes :-(

It's nice to hear that the API has stabilized, though :-)

d