Message from discussion Feel free to test queryset-refactor branch

Received: by 10.35.39.1 with SMTP id r1mr5316238pyj.4.1208523953772;
        Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:05:53 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <siram...@gmail.com>
Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.186])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTP id z53si12494612pyg.1.2008.04.18.06.05.52;
        Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:05:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of siram...@gmail.com designates 64.233.182.186 as permitted sender) client-ip=64.233.182.186;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of siram...@gmail.com designates 64.233.182.186 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=siram...@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header...@gmail.com
Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id e27so218525nfd.42
        for <django-users@googlegroups.com>; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:05:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:from:reply-to:to:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=4dJhgKK6/Z+4L9JWnvf+QxQ62vsK1uOLbS1yg4b36n4=;
        b=FLoZGVM2CUVnk3LR5KymHfntegW8aTgfI/goUfCZGSbGWuKiXPUG3t7DwrEb8Ym8QsORJbHkDChDB6NoofE8mG8eGcbng5FGKSDoLmMxbt798i4UKq5WdIs/Rt3BltB50WrWQ62zjNC7gIW328ScI95S8WSNDzv8P0hbEhpQ86c=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=subject:from:reply-to:to:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=d7cW11X0ZDSBpV7thaVQWyV3UMHfiUx/JK3V+0EcW4Jb8tgz1zSTzyX7c5ZELZvUCWu9jgGrb9RN6DUxTsE1wceMQYEpG+0T2D/w8tSyg9d2U3RA7PGYwRWHSBn1+q2JsCBXUgPY0bC35Ob1rnTyZT1wgxRjJz/Pc2kmKLw4OW4=
Received: by 10.78.132.2 with SMTP id f2mr3274966hud.83.1208523951720;
        Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:05:51 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <siram...@gmail.com>
Received: from ?192.168.1.20? ( [81.32.126.97])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z32sm4839567hub.25.2008.04.18.06.05.46
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
        Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:05:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Feel free to test queryset-refactor branch
From: Chris Hoeppner <siram...@gmail.com>
Reply-To: siram...@gmail.com
To: django-users@googlegroups.com
In-Reply-To: <1208085814.17060.31.ca...@counterweight.tredinnick.org>
References: <1208085814.17060.31.ca...@counterweight.tredinnick.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:05:36 +0100
Message-Id: <1208523936.7932.0.camel@Neriak>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

I wonder if anyone has tried coming up with some sort of wannabe-backend
for the GAE Datastore?

~ Chris

El dom, 13-04-2008 a las 21:23 +1000, Malcolm Tredinnick escribió:
> We're getting pretty close to merging queryset-refactor into trunk and
> would like to do this as soon as practical. There are still a couple of
> enhancements to add (#5420, mostly), one bug to fix (#5937) and some
> internal tweaking to do, but all the main stuff is ready to be used.
> 
> So if anybody wants to test it out, go ahead. Read the wiki page[1] if
> you've got code that does any slightly unusual stuff, but for existing
> code that works on trunk, there shouldn't be any real changes required.
> 
> [1] http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/QuerysetRefactorBranch
> 
> File any bug reports in Trac against the queryset-refactor
> "version" (please do NOT put the qs-rf keyword on the ticket; I'm using
> that for other purposes). Bug reports that are regressions from existing
> functionality are more interesting and important at the moment than
> feature enhancements to the new features, since the latter case can be
> dealt with at our leisure (they're not features that people are already
> relying upon).
> 
> If you see any different results testing against the branch compared to
> trunk, it would be interesting to know about them. Reduce it to a small
> example before opening a ticket, wherever possible. Please don't make me
> wade through dozens of lines of code just to get to one query that is
> relevant. Bear in mind, though, that the difference could be because a
> bug existed in trunk and the branch is now giving the correct result. So
> make sure your test case is valid (even I got bitten by that in a
> project I wrote).
> 
> Regards,
> Malcolm
>