> I agree that TorqueRuntimeException is more > descriptive. I say go for it.
Sounds great. My hesitation is that the templates are a mess and I really don't want to modify them, save for bug fixes, without doing a complete refactoring. I'd like to do that refactoring in v4, assuming it happens (OJB lurks ever present), and so I'm thinking this TorqueRuntimeException will be something we can easily implement in v4 and with clean slate. Sound okay? - Stephen -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
