More 'About Storm'

[Stuart Bishop]

Mark Ramm wrote:
> Just my 2 cents, but this approach seems a bit heavy-handed to me.
> 
> Do you really think that *none* of the other Python ORM's provide any
> of the features listed here?  If so, I think you may be missing one or
> two projects. ;)

Of course other Python ORMs provide some of the features listed here. I
don't think any of the others meet *all* the points listed here though, and
if they do the list should be extended as the goal is to point out how come
Storm is different and has a reason for existing. And if such a list cannot
be made, it really shouldn't exist as it would just be a reinvented wheel.

The front page should give developers enough information to decide if Storm
might be right for their project or not. It is also good to list things that
Storm doesn't do, so perhaps

 * Does not generate your database schema.

Which is either a positive or negative depending on your POV, so we cannot
categorize such a list into positive and negative features. Indeed - Storm's
 ability to work easily with multiple datastores could be seen as a
negative, as it generates a little complexity and abstraction that is not
needed for the vast bulk of projects out there. Also 'not dictating your
data model' - some people love object databases because they don't have to
do all that 'icky database design stuff, and an ODB or an ORM that generates
a schema can be great for small projects that have no need to invest time is
designing their storage layout.

> I'm hoping that we can avoid some my "ORM is better than yours
> flamewars"  (perhaps initiated by people out side of the Storm
> community) and actually have a discussion of relative technical
> merits.   And the "nobody else has ever done this" tone of this
> message seems a bit incendiary, so I'm hoping it gets a bit of editing
> before it becomes the "official" marketing message.

Sure. I tried to be non-incendiary, but posted it to the list so it can go
through the 'political filter' rather than editing the front page directly
so wording changes and suggestions are fine by me :) It would be extremely
bad form to belittle other projects for Storm's benefit, particularly since
it is really standing on the shoulders of earlier projects (even when these
projects showed what *not* to do in some cases - if they hadn't made those
design choices Storm devs might have and shot themselves in the foot).
However, Storm does need to point out what it can do or it will just be
ignored, with devs not even bothering to download it when evaluating tools
for a project. At the moment, it just tells people it is 'an
object-relational mapper for Python' which is as nearly content free as
possible :-/ Wearing my Python developers had, if I was evaluating ORMs and
wasn't using external recommendations, I would not get beyond the front page
of Storm - it would fall of my radar after one click. Which is all extremely
non-incendiary and non-confrontational, but not really fair to Storm which
happens to rock.

IIRC Storm was developed and adopted because one of the Canonical projects
needed a feature that just did not exist in anything else *right now*, and
it was determined that it was quicker to implement the basic ORM with that
feature that integrate it into any of the other projects that where looked
at. And given how quickly the basics where implemented and integrated into
that project, I think that the call was right. Should something like this
(or the true account IIRC incorrectly) be there too?

From other messages in this thread, we should also list:

 * Pure Python, running everywhere Python does (Linux, Windows, Mac OSX, and
many, many more).

(I'm pretty certain all the existing ORMs meet that, and they should all
mention it because Python rocks too).


-- 
Stuart Bishop <stuart.bishop at canonical.com>   http://www.canonical.com/
Canonical Ltd.                                http://www.ubuntu.com/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/private/storm/attachments/20070712/7c3c606e/attachment-0001.pgp