Hi Joachim, I think we both clearly showed our attitude. So here my final words (before things start getting emotional):
I don't think we will bloat jOOQ by adding a very small class having a one-line payload and being very simple. Neglecting it just because it's bloat sounds a little too academic for me. The addition of the class will immediate solve a real-world problem for people working with maven (which are quite many) and JPA / hibernate / eclipselink / etc. (which are many as well). Just saying "you use maven / jpa / hibernate instead of [INSERT PRODUCT HERE] so it's your own fault... you gotta do some really ugly work just to integrate jooq nicely" is not the best way to adapt new users. The current naming strategy integration *imho* is not adequate for maven-only projects. Rolling a better naming strategy which integrates nicer into maven should be the final solution. However this is no easy task. Once we get there nuking the silly one-liner should not be a great deal. So yes, I would like to add some temporary "bloat". And "yes" it will solve some issues immediately. Cheers Peter -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
