Nate Lowrie wrote: > On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 1:09 PM, Paul McNett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I want to do it, but up until now I felt I was the only one. I thought I >> was going to need this for something I was working on but implemented it >> differently, so its no longer critical for me. > > If I implement Ticket 1034 would y'all be willing to include it? If > so, do you want to do the first or second way as described in the > ticket?
Well I think it would depend on a number of things, including how well it is implemented. :) I like way #1, but I don't like how much it will rock the boat with existing applications, and I can't picture how we could do DeprecationWarnings if we are to retain the dForm and dDialog names. Way #2 is probably better in a practical sense (dForm and dDataDialog would mix-in dBaseForm/Dialog and the data mediator; dBaseForm and dDialog wouldn't, leaving them as the are right now. But it does add some smell long-term. First step would to make the data mediator mixin. Also, I don't believe Ed has ever weighed in on this ticket (I could be wrong, though). Do it in a branch so we can try it out first. Paul _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-dev Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-dev This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
