David Wynter wrote:

Hi Eric,

In the second URL below you ask the question why have Group in Security as
it complicates things. Well my experience with this is that it is useful.
For example you can have users who have the role of Accountant. One group
might be the NW office and another Head Office. The 1st group will have a
restriction on accounts viewable based on the NW office cost centre and the
Head Office lot have no such restriction. You need the extra dimension to
manage this, unless you want to start muddying the permissions with this.
Groups in my experience are usually geographically distinct groups of
people.

By the way, the reason for my earlier problem with TorqueComponent not
running was that in the torque.properties distributed with torque 3.1
release as required by T2.3 release the use of JDBC2PoolFactory in the
commented out is no longer valid. I whad been using this rather than the
Torque Pool. I did not realise they had removed this between torque 3.1 beta
and release. Combined with the fragile exception handling in T2.3 I took
ages to find it.


read the changelog!!
the jdbc2 pool was just renamed as it was no good idea to call it jdbc2 .. now it's called SharedPool and the default properties file should reflect this (i'll check this)


what's about ojb??
torque and ojb developers will join forces to make the torque generator work for ojb (it already has support for it) and i'll work on migration tools to make it easy to switch from torque to ojb ... as ojb is an apache project (and i'm an ojb commiter ;-) i prefere to add support for ojb first


martin

David



-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Pugh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 09 September 2002 16:52
To: 'Turbine Users List'
Subject: RE: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?


I for one am hell for leather headed towards using Hibernate. I used torque before, but for various reasons decided to go for Hibernate. You aren't wasting your time building your project in torque however IF, and big IF, you use a good seperation between objects and data objects. If you have business logic spewed all over your various Torque objects, then you will hate life when it comes time to port. But, if you have data objects (torque) and then either wrappers or business objects that pull from data objects, then porting is not too bad.

What I learned was the ORM tools may come and go.  Torque, then Hibernate,
but I bet is in time it'll be something else.  Hence the reason
to seperate
it out.

Basically, if you can write your app with NO persistence, and
then later add
your persistence in, then you wrote it correctly, and plugging in
Torque/Hibernate/JDO will be okay...

I use hibernate extensively and successfully with Turbine.  There is a
howto:
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/turbine-2.3/howto/hibernate-howto.html
available.  Getting started with Hibernate via Avalon also get's you ready
for T2.4 and lots of Avalonized components!

Also,
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/fulcrum/multiproject/fulcrum-sec
urity/inde
x.html there is a hibernate based security system.  And in the
unit tests is
an example of using it in t2.3 with the turbine user/groups/roles etc...

Eric



-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Pomar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 5:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Hibernate or Torque... What's the Future?


A proposal is included in Turbine version 2.3 to integrate Hibernate.


It is my impression Hibernate is widely used and has fantastic
documentation. There are a number of code generation
utilities for it, and
it appears to be well tested and high performance.

I would like to make sure that I'm not wasting my time
builing my project on
Torque if it will be replaced by Hibernate in the near future.

Does anyone know the status of the Hibernate integration?

Thanks,
- Matt





--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to