Forum OpenACS Q&A: Response to Future plan for ACS/Pg

Collapse
Posted by Ben Adida on
There are many, many ways this could go, beyond those two possibilities mentioned. For example, we could convince aD to abstract their SQL out a little better to make our life much easier. Then porting would be much easier, and would certainly be worth the time.

At the end of the day, my motivations are:

- making ACS/pg solid and useful

- allowing outside contributions to ACS/pg in the form of easily installed and configured "modules" in the *real* sense of the word.

- having a good templating system to separate the roles of programmers and designers

- making porting to Postgres and *other* DBs, if not automatic, at least easier by providing some level of separation between Tcl and SQL.

These steps are just ways to make ACS/pg a true open-source system where many can contribute. I'm pretty sure most ACS/pg developers and users agree with this line of reasoning (but if not, please post to the ACS/pg Future forum!). The big question is simply whether ArsDigita wants the same thing. If what they want is close enough, we'll keep porting (and I'll keep doing this porting as long as I possibly can). If not, then we'll have to evaluate our options.

More on this very soon, just let me get all my facts together and I'll post something a bit more coherent :)