On Mar 28, 2008, at 2:01 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
I don't know about that one. While the overall mapping structure is
what
the user designed, in this case, the user explicitly removed (or never
added) the relationship to the base class. In that case, I'd argue
that the
use didn't want the relationship mapped. That was certainly the
case for
me.
That's the main area of disagreement. Essentially you are saying that
runtime relationships are harmful and not needed in Cayenne at all. My
point is that they were introduced exactly to allow users to remove
explicit relationships whenever they please (the original motivation
for runtime relationships was to enable one-way to-many). In other
words runtime relationships are there for a reason and should be
considered an internal artifact of Cayenne and users shouldn't be
bothered about their presence (as long as everything works as
advertised).
So we should separate cases where runtime relationships are the cause
of the problem vs. cases where the problem is elsewhere.
So regarding runtime relationships... Maybe we should write targeted
unit tests to demonstrate delete rules and/or validation problems they
may cause?
Andrus
