Dan,

> > This wasn't a problem in previous versions of DataMapper. Do I need to
> > change anything in the relationships between those two models?
>
> The relationships had to be completely rewritten for DM 0.10 because
> too many things were broken.  I started off refactoring the old
> relationships, but as I dug deeper I found more and more issues.
> Eventually I realized it was the architecture that was the main
> limiting factor, so I ripped the old code out and rewrote
> relationships, speccing the behavior up-front.  I won't say they are
> perfect yet (as your report shows), but they are light-years ahead of
> 0.9 in terms of functionality, consistency, and code cleanliness.
>

Thanks for clarifying that. I'm sure the refactoring will pay dividends in
the future.
In the meantime, I think my best option is to revert back to DM 0.9. until
we iron
this one out.


> Before we dive into this, can you make a stand-alone script that
> reproduces the problem, and then try running it against edge dm-core
> in git?  If the problem persists, please create a ticket in our bug
> tracker (http://datamapper.lighthouseapp.com/) and attach your script
> to the ticket.
>


OK, I'll see if I can reproduce the issue in a stand-alone script. I might
need
some help running it against edge dm-core though. Are there any pointers on
how to do this?

Cheers,
Drew



>
> --
>
> Dan
> (dkubb)
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"DataMapper" 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/datamapper?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to