Agreed.
2013/7/22 Henry Saputra <[email protected]> > Ah yes I am seeing the change from namespace-rename branch in master. Cool! > > Lets stick with master branch unless the changes are bug and may break > existing flow the we could use remote branch to collaborate > > - Henry > > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 2:53 AM, Kasper Sørensen < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > I already applied the change to the master branch and pushed it to > origin, > > like you instructed. > > > > > > 2013/7/22 Henry Saputra <[email protected]> > > > > > Kasper is this pacth should be applied to changes you made > > > in namespace-rename git branch? > > > > > > - Henry > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 1:33 AM, Kasper Sørensen < > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Here's the patch. It's fairly trivial IMO, but as the unittest (and > > > sample > > > > in the above email) shows, it reduces LoC quite a lot if you want to > do > > > > this sort of join and you know the table/column names. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2013/7/18 Henry Saputra <[email protected]> > > > > > > > >> Hi Kasper, > > > >> > > > >> You could just attach proposed patch here and review through list > for > > a > > > >> while. I have pinged INFRA about the JIRA component. > > > >> > > > >> I will also try to get reviewboard (https://reviews.apache.org) for > > > >> MetaModel > > > >> > > > >> - Henry > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 1:20 AM, Kasper Sørensen < > > > >> [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > Hi guys, > > > >> > > > > >> > I have a few improvements to the fluent Query builder API, that I > > > would > > > >> > like to commit. > > > >> > > > > >> > Basically the fluent Query builder API supports building joins, > but > > > >> only if > > > >> > you've already traversed Table and Column objects from the schema > > > model. > > > >> > What I would like to improve is to add String-based builder > methods > > so > > > >> that > > > >> > instead of something quite verbose like this... > > > >> > > > > >> > Table table1 = dataContext.getTableByName("table1"); > > > >> > Column col1 = table1.getColumnByName("col1"); > > > >> > > > > >> > Table table2 = dataContext.getTableByName("table2"); > > > >> > Column col2 = table2.getColumnByName("col2"); > > > >> > > > > >> > DataSet ds = dataContext.query() > > > >> > .from(table1).innerJoin(table2).on(col1, col2).execute(); > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > One could alternatively just use the table/column names directly > in > > > the > > > >> > builder API, like this: > > > >> > > > > >> > DataSet ds = dataContext.query() > > > >> > .from("table1").innerJoin("table2").on("col1", > > "col2").execute(); > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Since we dont have JIRA up and running yet, I didn't find a proper > > way > > > >> to > > > >> > add this as an improvement anywhere. Should I just commit anyway, > or > > > >> hold > > > >> > my commit until JIRA is up? Or are there any objections to the > > > >> improvement? > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
