I'd +1 (1). No opinion on the other. I'd say that you have to ask yourself if you can introduce changes later without breaking - or with minor changes - to the public api.
On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Markus Zywitza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello > > Earlier today I commited a patch to ActiveRecord that restored the behaviour > of SessionScope with respect to flushing. This change was crucial for a > release because it prevents user from having to flush manually when using > session scopes. > > I also want to change TransactionScope to use FlushMode.Auto instead of > FlushMode.Commit. This would be a breaking change, but it also standardizes > flushing behaviour for all types of scopes. This helps especially in DDD > since the transaction can be controlled outside of the model, with no manual > flushes necessary. Additionally, there is no difference between code running > in SessionScope and code running in a TransactionScope. > > Other ideas I'd love to see in 1.0, but that could also come in 1.1: > > StatelessSessionScope > Event support (configuration/Windsor) > Adding hbm.xml files for hybrid AR/NH use. > > So what are your opinions on > > changing TransactionScope and > releasing now or first completing NH2.0 support? > > -Markus > > > > -- Cheers, hammett http://hammett.castleproject.org/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Development List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
