2016-05-04 18:13 GMT+02:00 Samir Faci <[email protected]>: > Thanks Lukas. I can't wait for this fix to come out. >
In the context of this issue, this will always qualify as a pun ;-) > I'm not sure we ever used DSL.field(Row[n]) intentionally or use that > pattern but > I do know we use the DSL.field(String) extensively in one of our projects. > Yes. > It's so heavily used that migrating away from using that would be an > equivalent effort of switching to another framework. > Well, you could create a dummy org.jooq.impl.DSL class on your classpath, refactor-rename the field(String) method to xmfxmf(String) with your IDE, search-replace xmfxmf\(.*?\) by field($1, Object.class), and you're all set :) But still, removing DSL.field(Row[N]) is a better option. > I can't wait for this fix to come out. We can stop dual releasing > artifacts as we migrated over to Jooq +3.6 and simply update the version as > it should be. > In fact, you don't have to wait. You can patch your distribution and remove the methods with little risk. Any upgrade you'll ever do will have the fix. Hope this helps, Lukas -- 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/d/optout.
