On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Stanislav Muhametsin <[email protected]> wrote:
> For me, this is maybe where Qi4j went a little wrong. I admit that the > project I am currently using Qi4j in is very different from most projects > out there. The Qi4j (and pretty much 99% of other frameworks out there) > represents a "application-owned-repository" -vision, where the application > which uses this framework is the only one which can access repository. > However, my project has it opposite: "repository owns application", ie there > is a single repository, and multiple applications (simultaneously) access > it: read and write and create. Therefore one single Qi4j app can not decide > the format how to store entities, the identity of entities comes from > repository (and not application), etc etc. This therefore renders the Qi4j's > concepts of Entities and UnitOfWork useless for me. Can you elaborate on what do you mean by this (I can't even guess)?? Perhaps you even have some pointer to articles describing what you are talking about... Because breaking out UoW et al into an extension is not easily achievable in a usable fashion, so we would need to see "another side" before even thinking of doing this. Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/3xugrbk I work here; http://tinyurl.com/24svnvk I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
