Maybe instead of putting them into something called Cayenne, it would make more sense to stick them into something along the lines of CayenneModel.
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Andrus Adamchik <[email protected]>wrote: > This was my concern all along. Calling a class "Cayenne" imposes certain > expectations. This should be a collection of frequently-used utility > methods. > > Andrus > > On Aug 23, 2010, at 3:57 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote: > > On Aug 23, 2010, at 3:46 PM, Michael Gentry wrote: > > > >> I wonder if that > >> class will just start to become a dumping ground in the future? > > > > That's what we certainly should try to avoid. > > > > Andrus > > > >
