Understood.

3.1 is stable already as in “frozen API and no new features”. I am waiting for 
one bug fix to go through, and then I am going to propose a release candidate. 
There are still gaps in the docs though.

Andrus



On Jan 16, 2014, at 5:04 PM, Emile Salem <[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks for the quick answer.
> 
> The reason we chose 3.0 over 3.1 is we didn’t want to use a beta version in 
> our production environment. Because we’re scared of that word, "Beta".
> 
> No problem with the code mentioned, I gave it a dataContextFactory that 
> behaves like default. I was just curious as to why I should be forced to use 
> a dataContextFactory in order to get my queryCacheFactory accepted, I thought 
> I might be missing something.
> 
> How far is 3.1 from becoming stable?
> 
> Le 2014-01-16 à 02:05, Andrus Adamchik <[email protected]> a écrit :
> 
>> Hi Émile,
>> 
>> Welcome to the community!
>> 
>> Looks suspect to me too :) The good news is that 3.0 is ancient news and 
>> these days stack initialization is handled via dependency injection and more 
>> or less completely outside of the stack objects themselves.
>> 
>> Not sure if that code is causing you any trouble (if so, let’s discuss), but 
>> in general I would recommend switching to 3.1 beta for your work.
>> 
>> Andrus
>> 
>> 
>> On Jan 15, 2014, at 8:05 PM, Emile Salem <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hi there,
>>> 
>>> as a first post to this list, I’d like to ask the following:
>>> why does the DataDomain need to have a dataContextFactory declared in 
>>> its properties for the assignment of its queryCacheFactory to take place, 
>>> as read on line 258 of org.apache.cayenne.access.DataDomain (3.0.2):
>>> 
>>> if ((queryCacheFactoryName != null) && (dataContextFactory != null) && 
>>> (!Util.isEmptyString(dataContextFactory))){
>>>  this.queryCacheFactory = 
>>> ((QueryCacheFactory)createInstance(queryCacheFactoryName, 
>>> QueryCacheFactory.class));
>>> }
>>> else{
>>>  this.queryCacheFactory = null;
>>> }
>>> Thanks for your time
>>> 
>>> ÉMILE SALEM
>>> Software Developer
>>> [email protected]
> 
> 

Reply via email to