[Lift] Re: Unwarranted dependencies in lift-record

2009-10-01 Thread David Pollak
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 2:42 AM, Timothy Perrett timo...@getintheloop.euwrote:


 Guys,

 I just noticed that lift-record depends on lift-webket because of some
 calls to S... IMHO, we need to remove this because thats simply too
 tight a coupling between the webkit and an abstract persistence
 interface like record.

 For instance, one record abstraction I wrote isn't even used in
 webapps...

 Thoughts?


One of my criteria for a Record class is that it must be able to translate
itself to/from HTML forms (as well as XML and JSON).  If you can find a way
for Record to play nicely with HTML form generation in with lift-webkit and
without it, cool.  I'm all for it.



 Cheers, Tim
 



-- 
Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
Surf the harmonics

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Lift group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



[Lift] Re: Unwarranted dependencies in lift-record

2009-09-29 Thread Timothy Perrett

This is my point - record should be more abstract... we dont want it  
depending on all that stuff its pointless.

@dpp or @marius... what are your thoughts?

Cheers, Tim

On 29 Sep 2009, at 12:44, Indrajit Raychaudhuri wrote:


 lift-record depends on lift-mapper and since lift-mapper is heavily
 dependent on lift-webkit, lift-record ends up depending on lift-webkit
 as well.

 So at the moment, lift-record would end up depending on lift-webkit  
 (and
 lift-widget!) indirectly even if you remove reference to lift-webkit
 (superfluous) from lift-record pom.

 lift-widget part is simpler (just one reference in MappedInt, intend  
 to
 take up later if somebody else don't beat me) but lift-webkit looks  
 lot
 of work.

 Cheers, Indrajit


 On 29/09/09 3:12 PM, Timothy Perrett wrote:

 Guys,

 I just noticed that lift-record depends on lift-webket because of  
 some
 calls to S... IMHO, we need to remove this because thats simply too
 tight a coupling between the webkit and an abstract persistence
 interface like record.

 For instance, one record abstraction I wrote isn't even used in
 webapps...

 Thoughts?

 Cheers, Tim


 



--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Lift group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---