Hi, +1 on this statement. I can definetly live with this.
Kind regards J�rgen Hoffmann ByteACTION GmbH cert. Perl Programmer cert. Linux System Administrator cert. Java Programmer -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- Von: Henning P. Schmiedehausen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Freitag, 21. M�rz 2003 15:30 An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Re: [POLL] Deprecation of the OBJECT_DATA column in TURBINE_USER table "Akmal Sarhan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >IMO this should be kept at least till the next major release, the >problem is that it involves changing all the the logic and work arounds >that we did,trying to avoid the hassle of extending the turbineUser, so >if we want to migrate a project that already utilizes this logic, it >will be quite a mess I guess. so keep it for backword compatibility and >mention in your release docs that you disencourage users from using >this approach because so and so and that it be deprecated in the next >major release. Everyone, we want to _deprecate_ it, not remove it. setPerm and the OBJECT_DATA will definitely be in 2.3, but we want to discourage people who start with 2.3 to use it for new applications. And, with TorqueSecurity, it is actually pretty easy to re-add a "blob" field again. =:-) Regards Henning -- Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen INTERMETA GmbH [EMAIL PROTECTED] +49 9131 50 654 0 http://www.intermeta.de/ Java, perl, Solaris, Linux, xSP Consulting, Web Services freelance consultant -- Jakarta Turbine Development -- hero for hire --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
