On 10/25/05 6:54 AM, Sean Davis wrote:
> I've used RDBO for less than 24 hours and I really like it so far. I was
> just curious what thoughts folks have about designing reusable "plugins" for
> RDBO. I'll admit that I haven't done my homework on this yet except to
> glance over CPAN and quickly
0.079 (10.25.2005) - John Siracusa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Fixed bugs that caused auto-inited many-to-many relationships
to be inadequately fleshed-out under some circumstances.
This version requires the also-freshly-released Rose::DB version 0.031.
-John
On 10/25/05 8:02 AM, Sean Davis wrote:
> No Rose::DB::Object-derived class found for catalog '' schema 'public' table
> 'g_main' at /Library/Perl/5.8.6/Rose/DB/Object/Metadata/Auto.pm line 402.
> No Rose::DB::Object-derived class found for catalog '' schema 'public' table
> 'ug_main' at /Library/Pe
On 10/25/05, Terrence Brannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been watching this conversation without comment for the past few days
> but I feel pulled into action. Basically, I am starting to wonder about
> things like Class::DBI and RDBO which require you to remodel what you
> already modelled
I've been watching this conversation without comment for the past few
days but I feel pulled into action. Basically, I am starting to wonder
about things like Class::DBI and RDBO which require you to remodel what
you already modelled in the database schema.
More and more, I am attracted to things
Using RDBO 0.78. Schema, class definitions, and class definitions are
below. I get the following errors in executing the test code. Sorry to
post so many questions in such a short period of time.
No Rose::DB::Object-derived class found for catalog '' schema 'public' table
'g_main' at /Library/P
I've used RDBO for less than 24 hours and I really like it so far. I was
just curious what thoughts folks have about designing reusable "plugins" for
RDBO. I'll admit that I haven't done my homework on this yet except to
glance over CPAN and quickly browse the archives. Such capability is
gettin
