db-ojb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thomas Mahler <t...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Patch for tutorial1.xml
Date Sun, 08 Dec 2002 11:27:44 GMT
Hi Tim,

O'brien, Tim wrote:
> Good catches Antony, see below....  I'm going to submit a patch in a sec.
> 
> OJB commiters, do you prefer email patches or patches via Scarab?  (I'm
> partial to patches via email because they do often spark a good discussion
> like the one below, but I found out recently that the Struts proejcts likes
> to have all patches submitted via Bugzilla.)
> 

Currently it's better to post patches via email. I'm currently working 
on getting Scarab to post emails to the developer list. Once this works 
we should use scarab alone for changes requests, bug reports, fixes etc.

I'll keep you updated.

> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Antony S. Kraievoy [mailto:archvile@ukr.net] 
> 
> 
>>[PersistenceBroker tutorial/deleting objects subpart/useCase code 
>>sample] contains this line:
>>
>> >Query query = new QueryByExample(example);
>>
> 
> 
>>From what I see QueryByExample is not in the current release of OJB, but it
> was in OJB 0.9.4.  My own confusion stemmed from the fact that the Javadoc
> on the site was pointing to the 0.9.4 release.   This is fixed in tutorial1
> for the patch.
> 
> 
>>don't know why, but this part of docs is too wide for IE & NS browsers 
>>at 1024x768 resolution.
> 
> 
> I have the same problem, when I run the "xslt" task in build.xml, I get a
> site that looks dramatically different from the published site, I'm not sure
> how this can be fixed.  Anyone?
> 
> 
>>[ODMG API tutorial/updating object subpart/useCase code sample]
>>
>> >tx.lock(toBeEdited, tx.WRITE);
>>
>>the WRITE field is static - i think there should be
>>
>>  tx.lock(toBeEdited, Transaction.WRITE);
> 
> 
> Referencing a public static constant through an instance variable is covered
> by Section 10.2 in Sun's Code Conventions.
> http://java.sun.com/docs/codeconv/html/CodeConventions.doc9.html#587, not
> that we should necessarily conform to Sun's standards, but I've found it a
> good practice.
> 
> I fixed this in the patch in tutorial2 and the faq.
> 
> 
>>call to lock(...,...) may raise LockNotGrantedException 
>>
>>by the way, indentation of this piece of code makes me think 
>>that there 
>>WAS some try/catch block :)
> 
> 
> It is something that could cause issues, I added a try/catch back to that
> code example, just so that someone doesn't run into the same problem down
> the road.  You'll notice that I added catch block with a comment "removed
> for brevity", is this a good solution?
> 
> 
>>[FAQ\I don't like OQL, can I use the PersistenceBroker 
>>Queries within ODMG?]  >If you have a look at 
>>org.apache.ojb.odmg.oql.OqlQueryImpl.execute() 
>>you will see ...
>>  this class is named   org.apache.ojb.odmg.oql.OQLQueryImpl
> 
> 
> I looked at this, and changed it to "the <code>execute()</code> method in
> <code>org.apache.ojb.odmg.oql.OqlQueryImpl</code>".  I didn't find it
> generally confusing in the original form, but I can see how it might be
> visually confusing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:ojb-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:ojb-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
> 
> 
> 




Mime
View raw message