On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 11:34 -0500, Jesus M. Rodriguez wrote: > Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Jan 2008, Adrian Likins wrote: > > > >>> Hrm. Is the config enough? How small are these groups? If we go with > >>> a DB, anything that SQLAlchemy can use would be fine with me. That way > >>> when func gets big and needs a REAL DB it would be easier to switch > >>> and not have to gut a lot of code. > >> Ugh. What do we forsee func needing a REAL DB for? I'd like to > >> avoid that at pretty much any cost. > > > > I foresee applications built *on top of* Func that may require this. But > > if you need a real DB *inside of* Func, you've made a mistake, in my > > estimation. > > > > func should be like rpm should have been. Central to many great > > applications, but as simple as it can be. :) > > > > --g > > > > Now this I can agree with. Effectively making func the core or foundation > with which I build my application on top of. > > NOTE: so this is what discussions are like. crazy when things are all open-source-y and stuff, huh? :) -sv _______________________________________________ Func-list mailing list Func-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/func-list
