Yeah, I wasn't making an excuse, just sharing my perception of
reality :-)
Andrus
On Oct 9, 2009, at 4:23 PM, Michael Gentry wrote:
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
