Brian Beck wrote: > Just a note, I think the 'cascade' keyword argument is deprecated, it > should work the same without it. When you said you were "almost" there > -- what else needs to be done? I'm using the same method as above to > model a tree currently and it's working okay for me.
Brian are you sure that the cascade keyword is deprecated? I have checked both the online documentation and the (0.8) source but didn't found any info about it beeing deprecated. Personally I have found the cascade options verry usefull to declare contraints in the problem domain. For instance, one shoudn't be able to delete a customer 'record' once it has been linked to an order etc. Writting such logic without help of the persistence layer would be tedious. By 'amost' I reffered to Michael. His catagory model is verry similar, except for using a RelatedJoin instead of a MultipleJoin :)
