I traced back the origins of the commented out line [1], and it was introduced in commented out form (in a different file). That would tend to suggest that it was there as a reminder of the right thing to do one other infrastructure was in place, rather than being commented out because it wasn't right. If uncommenting this line causes the right kind of behaviour and does not introduce other test errors, then I guess that more recent changes have made this line of code viable.
[1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/tuscany/java/sdo/impl/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sdo/util/SDOUtil.java?r1=394728&r2=396004&pathrev=396004 On 20/03/2008, David Adcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Currently, alias name support is disabled in SDO, intentionally. The > SDOHelperImpl.addAliasName(Type,String) and > SDOHelperImpl.addAliasName(Property,String) throw an > UnsupportedOperationException when called. Does this function still > need to be disabled? When I remove these guards, my test cases seem > to function properly. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
