On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 11:49:29AM +0100, Peter Corlett wrote:
On 19 Apr 2009, at 11:14, Matt S Trout wrote:
Valid idea though, and something we should look at making a
capability in
storage for 09 - in the meantime I'd recommend rewriting it as a
reusltset
component just as people
Peter Corlett wrote:
On 19 Apr 2009, at 11:14, Matt S Trout wrote:
[...]
And the patch didn't come with tests, so I assumed he didn't *want*
it to
be applied ...
It was more a prompt for somebody with better inside knowledge of
DBIx::Class to take the idea and run with it or suggest a
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Matt S Trout dbix-cl...@trout.me.ukwrote:
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 01:17:07PM +0200, Francesc Romà i Frigolé wrote:
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 1:42 AM, Marc Mims m...@questright.com wrote:
I also removed DBIx::Class::UUIDColumns as a base class. I still 'use'
Okay, I have a question playing with this release.
We have observed that if you attempt to create-related a new row in a
table that has a belongs-to to a third table - and omit the hash entry
for the relationship column id in question entirely - we get an error:
