Hal Fulton wrote:

> Logan Capaldo wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Perhaps I would not even write an activerecord adapter but a  
>> KirbyBase ORM modeled on the activerecord style.
>>
>
> Perhaps... in fact, that might even be the key to my happiness.
>
> Maybe I'm tying to get Jamey to put stuff *into* KB that should
> really be an ORM wrapper *around* it.
>
> Thoughts? Logan, Jamey, others?

Hmmm, I don't know.  I know that my tendency is to continue to think in 
traditional "relational DBMS" terms and then Hal throws out some idea 
that seems crazy at first and then, after a while, starts to make sense.

On the other hand, I don't want to over-engineer KirbyBase so that it 
collapses under it's own weight.  So far, my criteria for deciding what 
goes into KirbyBase has been pretty rudimentary.  Usually I will start 
to code a new feature, sometimes even getting to the point where it's 
working.  Then I sit on it a little while and if it feels like the new 
code just doesn't "feel" like it belongs, I usually take it out.

Pretty scientific, huh?  :-)

Jamey