Sounds like a good plan Ross - have you any specific suggestions about how best to untangle things?
Marius - your thoughts as the own of Record? Cheers, Tim On 15 Feb 2010, at 15:03, Ross Mellgren wrote: > FWIW, I agree mostly completely, and when I was writing the integration I > didn't like the fact that I couldn't make one model object usable for both > Couch and an RDBMS (for example). I guess it could be made to support more > than one if the persistence-specific stuff was untangled from > MetaRecord/Record subclasses and made into mixable traits? > > -Ross > > On Feb 15, 2010, at 4:34 AM, Timothy Perrett wrote: > >> Debasish just posted this: >> >> http://debasishg.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-i-dont-like-activerecord-for-domain.html >> >> Interesting feedback especially regarding the current design of >> Record... >> >> Cheers, Tim >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lift" group. >> To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
