I'm quite OK with incremental changes. I was just pointing out that when you look at that one class (which is pretty core) it is a bit of a head-scratcher. No worries, though. And no one expects you to be Howard. One of Cayenne's strengths is the stability it has had.
Thanks, mrg On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:42 AM, Andrus Adamchik <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Oct 8, 2009, at 10:40 PM, Michael Gentry wrote: > >> It just seems like it is caught in 3 different lands: pre-generics, >> generics, and POJO. > > That's one of my biggest headaches. You'd be experimenting with new things, > going through trial and error cycles, learning, gathering feedback, and then > somewhere along that way your unfinished designs become public API and you > can't change it anymore. This is why JPA was so attractive at first - it has > a very thin layer of public API, and 85% of the framework is private. And > this is why I brought up dependency injection (and implicitly, coding to > interfaces) as a prospective future direction. > > Hmmm... sometimes I feel like attacking that the Tapestry (or Log4J/SLF4J) > way - rewriting things from scratch to have a fresh and fully consistent > framework. But then I realize that I won't be able to spend the next 2-3 > years of my life to create something that is already available and works, > and lose the entire community in the process. > > Alas, we are stuck in the imperfect world, and will have to make incremental > changes :-/ > > Andrus
