db-jdo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Matthew T. Adams" <matthew.ad...@xcalia.com>
Subject RE: RETRY: Transient instance referencing a detached instance?
Date Thu, 06 Oct 2005 00:31:27 GMT
Excellent.  Unless there's some technical reason that a user advocate like
me can't see, let's make this change.  Craig, others, can you please
comment?

--matthew

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Andy Jefferson [mailto:andy@jpox.org] 
>Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 12:09 PM
>To: 'JDO Expert Group'; jdo-dev@db.apache.org
>Subject: Re: RETRY: Transient instance referencing a detached instance?
>
>
>> > Would it be cleaner to not allow transient instances to be 
>included in
>> > attachCopy() graphs at all?  Sounds that way to me.
>>
>> No, I'd like to continue to allow transient instances to be 
>included in
>> attachCopy graphs.  I'd like to **add** the ability for 
>detached objects to
>> be included in makePersistent graphs.
>
>I'll second this requirement.
>I asked for it on 16 Sep - see the posting in the EG archives titled 
>"makePersistent with a detached object reachable".
>We need a consistent interface for persistence, and having one method 
>(makePersistent) doing things one way and another(attachCopy) doing it 
>another doesn't help IMHO.
>
>A user wants to persist a new object. They want to relate it 
>to another object 
>(in this case detached, but it could be any old object), and 
>then do the 
>persist. Having to work out which method to call in what 
>circumstances, 
>dependent on what objects you just happen to have in the graph is not 
>user-friendly.
>
>
>-- 
>Andy
>



Mime
View raw message