On May 11, 2008, at 5:34 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > Thirdly, how can we make this easier in Qi4j?
Oh, yes, please. An action item could work. As long as there are provisions for keeping the domain information separate from status information for processes (I would need to be able to model my business behaviour using several processes, so I need several states). Right now, you can have one or the other in a regular application. As a result, many applications lose your changes if something out of the ordinary happens unless the developer goes out of his way to keep the information. It should be the other way around. I should be able to toss out changes if that is necessary, but it shouldn't be the default. I want both, or rather all of this information, at the same time. At the same time, security and transaction information would follow the same kind of pattern easily. Some of this is request based. Other is session scoped - such as security information. It could, perhaps, all be persistent information if there are much stronger "transaction" type gadgets to roll back parts of the changes to the information. I have no idea how to design this. I am struggling enough to keep up with the changes you guys are doing. :) Geir _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
