Steve Clark wrote:
Armin Waibel writes:
Armin> ooh, seems I made a mistake in the test cases repository I Armin> don't specified a "non-removeaware" collection-class. Maybe Armin> I should read the docs before I start writing the next test Armin> cases ;-).
Not to beat a dead horse, but I think this is yet another very clear demonstration that the default behavior is counterintuitive. It really seems that it would be better for non-RemovalAwareCollection to be the default, with RemovalAwareCollection available as an option for those who want that behavior.
I agree with you, but some time ago the argument for using RemovalAwareCollections as default collection-class was to make PB-api delete collection objects behaviour similar to the ODMG-api. I don't know when we change collection-class, but originally non-RemovalAwareCollection was used as default one.
If most OJB user vote for an rollback to non-RAC, we can switch back again (hopefully the last time ;-)).
As an alternative I will have a look in source and try to make default collection-class pluggable via OJB.properties file. If it will be possible, we can satisfy both strategies.
regards, Armin
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
