[
http://issues.ops4j.org/browse/QI-221?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13281#action_13281
]
Rickard Öberg commented on QI-221:
----------------------------------
I've been thinking about this one, and am considering dropping nested UoW's
entirely. They add a lot of complexity, and the value is questionable. For
server usage I find myself only working with plain UoW, i.e. one request-one
UoW. For client usage, where nested UoW's would correspond to dialogs and such,
it is also questionable, at least if the main domain model is on the server.
The reason is that the client will be working with disconnected values rather
than the entities themselves, and so ok/cancel functionality will be done using
value semantics instead (i.e. current state is an immutable value, dialog opens
with mutable copy from builder, and then cancel throws it away and ok pushes
new value down to entities).
> Check nested UnitOfWork code so that it works properly.
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: QI-221
> URL: http://issues.ops4j.org/browse/QI-221
> Project: Qi4j
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Rickard Öberg
> Assignee: Rickard Öberg
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 1.0
>
>
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.ops4j.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
