Re: [gnome-db] What DWI does [was Re: GnuCash page on GO site]

Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-03-05 at 04:39 +1300, Andrew Hill wrote:
> 
> 
>>ok i'm gonna comment cause my projects are very similar to Lina's and 
>>i've run into similar problems to building the nessary tools to rapidly 
>>develop database applications for gnome. 
>>
>>My approach is very similar but silighty different.
>>developer builds sql database. (currently only postgresql fully 
>>supported, libgda and mysql very partial support)
>>glade xml is used to generate bond xml (http://bond.treshna.com)
>>developer adds in sql statements and attachs code they want to app.
>>reports can be written in papyrus (http://payrus.treshna.com)
>>database application front end ready to go and can be deployed.
>>
>>On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 10:17:18AM +0100, Rodrigo Moya was heard to remark:
>>
>>
>>>>http://dwi.sourceforge.net is the object framework I'm planning
>>>>on using for the future gnucash core engine.
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>
>>>what are the advantages of this over libgda?
>>>could you ellaborate more please?
>>> 
>>>
>>
>>This is a different to libgda.  dwi and bond are more higher up 
>>interfaces than libgda.  libgda requires writting code, and you'll often 
>>find yourself repeating the same tasks over and over again like 
>>inserting and updating sql statements, dealing with default values etc 
>>when you build a large db app.  libgda is a lot more powerful in some 
>>ways cause its lower down but if you want to write a huge app in a short 
>>amount of time its quicker and easier to manage your database objects 
>>and forms as one in  glade and xml etc.  It comes down to what type of 
>>application your writing/best tool for the job.
>>
> 
> right. The question is if, as bond/papyrus have tried to do, qof can be
> changed to use libgda for the basic data access.
> 
> Then, as I said in a previous mail, we can see what things make sense
> from it and either put them in libgda/libgnomedb/whatever, or keep them
> in its current place.
> 
> If all this conversation is about sharing technology, then, we've got:
> * libgda -> uniform data access to several data sources
> * qof stuff -> built on top of libgda
> 
> That's what I'm saying. Is there any chance of this?
> 
> cheers
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-db-list mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-db-list

gnomedb widgets need ability easy ability to popualte widgets from 
non-libda sources (proberly already possible). with possible tie-ins on 
sorting etc.  libgda api needs to be able to return field information 
attributes. API is a bit complex and messy compared with other simplier
data access libraries.  It has other things in there that proberly 
shoulnd't be sitting in libgda, though i imagine this is because of 
having to support a range of datbases and not just simply SQL.