Thanks, Mr. Gallagher. > When I first approached Thomas regarding what I wanted to > accomplish, we both agreed that my implementation did not fit > well into the 'core' OJB api. However, we agreed to > implement some new features and enhance some existing ones to > enable me to extend/customize OJB to support my needs. I'm > not sure if that view point has changed. Thomas may be able > to comment further.
I hope so. It seems that support for sp's and UDF's would be a logical, and in many cases, necessary extension to the framework. > I had to override getStatementsForClass(ClassDescriptor) > because the implementation provided by > org.apache.ojb.broker.accesslayer.StatementManager > instantiated the StatementsForClassImpl class, not my > extension (above). I was hoping this was not the case... :( > I believe that somewhere in my dialogs with Thomas, we > discussed the possibility of making the first situation > 'pluggable' so that neither of these extensions would be > required. Maybe some sort of 'StatementFactory' > implementation. I don't recall exactly where those > discussions went. Maybe it's time to reconsider the option > since others are starting to use stored procedures. Sounds like it to me as well. Should this be taken up on the dev list? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
