[Grok-dev] spotlight on: megrok.traject

Martijn Faassen faassen at startifact.com
Mon Jan 18 16:21:07 EST 2010

Hey Ethan,

Ethan Jucovy wrote:
> This is really cool -- both the spotlight and the package.  Thanks so
> much for the writeup!

I'm glad the spotlight introduced it to you!

> Reading this tonight, I started wondering how hard it would be to hook
> up Django models to a Grok project.  It's a very appealing idea to me
> because I like Django's model & template systems and its built-in web
> interface for administering records, but I don't like writing my own
> views in Django -- for custom application functionality I really
> prefer Grok's structured interfaces-and-objects approach.
> So I tried out a quick test, and I was really surprised (in a good
> way!) at how easy it was -- everything literally Just Worked.

Wow! That's pretty amazing!

> But for right now I'm starting to get tangled in the details so I
> should put this down for a bit.  I'd love to compare notes with anyone
> else who's interested in this sort of thing though.

This does open up a lot of interesting possibilities. I think with a 
little bit of cleanup you could turn what you wrote here into a proper 
document on grok.zope.org. Could you extend it a bit and post it online? 
(or just ask us to post it for you, just mail it to grok-dev). 
Alternatively just a buildout with a Django-Grok would be interesting to 
see - we could put it up in grok.zope.org/grokapps or something. We must 
record this for anyone coming along in the future who wants to mess 
around with this.

I am wondering how this deals with transactions. With zope.sqlalchemy we 
integrate Zope's transaction machinery into SQLAlchemy. I would expect 
something similar would need to happen here to ensure that data is 
properly committed.

I still need to wrap my head around this - using Django's ORM and form 
machinery in Grok. Wild!



More information about the Grok-dev mailing list