[
https://issues.apache.org/cayenne/browse/CAY-915?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12593
]
Ari Maniatis commented on CAY-915:
----------------------------------
I'm not seeing the "compelling reason to keep two hierarchies separate". Would
it not be always better to have a common superclass for both client and server?
I know it would make a huge amount of my code much much easier to deal with
(for example, we implement validation on both client and server side since we
want real time validation without a trip to the server).
I know this common superclass approach is lots of work, but shouldn't that be
the goal?
> Add ability to generate a common interface for client and server classes
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CAY-915
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/cayenne/browse/CAY-915
> Project: Cayenne
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: CayenneModeler GUI
> Affects Versions: 3.0
> Reporter: Kevin Menard
> Assignee: Kevin Menard
> Fix For: 3.0
>
>
> Currently there is a divide between ROP client and server classes.
> Ultimately, it'd be nice to see some unification of the two. In some
> applications, however, there is compelling reason to keep two hierarchies
> separate. In that case, it may still be beneficial to have a common
> interface that other code can use to interact with both client and server
> classes.
> Off hand, I'm thinking of two new fields to the class generation panel in the
> modeler:
> 1) Check box for indicating that the interfaces should be generated
> 2) A text field for specifying the package to use
> This also implies modifications to both the client and server superclass
> velocity templates.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
