On Mon, 2 Feb 2004, Brian McCallister wrote: > I have considered including the torque stuff in the ojb-blank project > before, and opted against it as I thought I might be pushing too much > complexity on users then. > > Right now there isn't an *ideal* way to create the internal tables as > most of the time people don't need them (though the hi/lo sequence > table is needed enough that this may be incorrect, since it is the > default sequence manager). > > What are thoughts on including the torque generator stuff in ojb-blank? > The ojb-core schema is already included in the src/schema directory, > but the build-torque and torque related jars are not included. Now that > I think about it, I have done this for all of the projects I have built > around ojb-blank bits anyway, so that is a certain argument in favor.
Perhaps there is another way. I've added the DBHandling stuff with its own ant task which would hide the torque dependency from the users (except for the jars) and also remove the necessity to have duplicate information about the location of the database (profile and connection descriptor). I might even be persuaded to add a little HOWTO for db-creation using this task, using torque, and using commons-sql/the ant sql task ... The only problem with this is that it needs adapting to the various OJB-supported databases (creation of databases via JDBC is not at all standardized) as currently only Hsqldb, Mysql and Postgresql are explictly supported. Tom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
