welcome app

[Massimo DiPierro]

What do you think about the new welcome app?
Do you think there is something that still needs fixing/improving?
What else do we need before we can release 2.0?

Massimo

[Francisco Costa]

a fully supported MongoDB Adapter.. MongoDB is becoming very popular (http://www.google.com/trends/?q=mongodb,+couchdb,+redis) special among startups and web-developers communities.. I think is a "market" you would want to target

Francisco Costa
http://franciscocosta.com

Massimo

--
mail from:GoogleGroups "web2py-developers" mailing list
make speech: web2py-d...@googlegroups.com
unsubscribe: web2py-develop...@googlegroups.com
details    : http://groups.google.com/group/web2py-developers
the project: http://code.google.com/p/web2py/
official    : http://www.web2py.com/

[Chris Steel]

+1

--
Christopher Steel

www.chrissteel.com

[pbreit]

Mongo is not necessary for 2.0. I say get it out and let's move on.

[Massimo DiPierro]

I agree with you. We have experimental mongo support but it is a big can of worms. The issue is not supporting mongo (which to some extent we do) but to allow dictionaries in fields win a way that is back ported to SQL databases. It cannot be done efficiently in both cases.

massimo

On May 26, 2012, at 1:25 AM, pbreit wrote:

> Mongo is not necessary for 2.0. I say get it out and let's move on.
>

[Anthony]

I agree with you. We have experimental mongo support but it is a big can of worms. The issue is not supporting mongo (which to some extent we do) but to allow dictionaries in fields win a way that is back ported to SQL databases. It cannot be done efficiently in both cases.

Would it be easier (at least for now) to allow dictionaries in MongoDB only and not worry about backporting to SQL databases? It's probably better to do a thorough job enabling the full capabilities of document databases like Mongo than to attempt to mimic some of their functionality in RDBMS's. Someone who uses Mongo is probably more concerned with taking full advantage of the document model than with the portability of the code to an RDBMS (if you switch from a document database to an RDBMS, it probably makes more sense to re-structure the database anyway).

Anthony

[Massimo Di Pierro]

yes, but we would still need to create new syntax to allow searching in those dictionary. Mark is working on that.

[pbreit]

Agree that it would be nice to have NoSQL-specific capabilities vs RDBMS capabilities. Could also support Postgres Hstore in that way as well as the various key/value and/or doc store DBs.