+1 from me too ... especially if this means we can programmatically write the mappings in tests too.
From: Stephen Bohlen Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 3:23 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [nhibernate-development] Mappings Since I ended that (long) thread with a +1 for proceeding, I will offer the same here: +1, I *still* feel strongly that this is worth proceeding with to incorporate into the core project. Clearly sooner > later so if you can do it for 3.2 I think that would be awesome news but realistically this is important enough to get 'right' that waiting for 3.3 isn't a bad choice either (so that there's time to take it as slow as needed to ensure it's well-vetted / reviewed / commented upon before its being part of a release). Steve Bohlen [email protected] http://blog.unhandled-exceptions.com http://twitter.com/sbohlen On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> wrote: FYI I didn't forgot this thread http://groups.google.com/group/nhibernate-development/browse_thread/thread/198cecde690b235d My intention is to use part of the work done in ConfORM. By "part" I mean basically the "engine" of the mapping. In NH the mapping will be explicit class-by-class with some hooks for simple matters (no Pattern/PatternAppliers as done in ConfORM). Note: I would avoid to force people to define a new class for each mapping; how organize mappings will be a users choice. Perhaps I can implement something for NH3.2GA release (end of April), perhaps I can't. My intention is to have the work pretty ready for NH3.3 Something to say ? -- Fabio Maulo
