Hello, > We could then discuss on > > Changes that are acceptable by the jooq community to be added to the core. > Changes that were done due to our wrong understanding. > And ones that we have to maintain separately.
I'll be very curious to see your improvements! Thanks in advance for sharing those. > Most of the changes were related to making some "impl" classes public to > allow for use/(and extension) outside the org.jooq.impl package . That is unlikely to make it into the core. jOOQ aims for clean separation of API and implementation. That's why most impl classes are package private. In the past, I have heavily refactored those classes in a way that would have broken any dependencies on them. But if I understand your requirements, we can maybe find another way (e.g. like the existing CustomField and CustomCondition) > And other notable ones are > We have split the TableRecord interface into TableRecord and > LiveTableRecord (forget the naming). LiveTableRecord contains the db ops. If I understand you correctly, this means separation of the "POJO" and operations upon the POJO? That's a good idea. > Support for "JoinProvider" (again forget the naming) interface in join > methods in order to support adding of both table and the join conditions. That, you'll have to show me. I'm not sure what this is about. > Extension to the configuration that allows for closing connections after the > query execution. I imagine this is useful in a J2EE container, in order to "close" (or return) the connection to the container? Might be worth thinking about as a runtime-configuration, once that is added to jOOQ Cheers Lukas
