On 1/17/07, Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think we should ask our selves, what does a user expect to happen
and make that the default. If every JPA implements this with the
loaded+fetchgroup style by default, and OpenJPA doesn't that would be
quite surprising to users and will
Do we have any experts with these xml namespaces? Or, anybody that wants to
become an expert? :-)
It seems like we need a real example of using these to make sure they are
viable. On paper, they look like the solution. But, Craig's concern about
allowing new member elements within existing
Just pinging on this one...
I think this might be a good chance to collect more use cases for the
plugin - wdyt?
Rahul
- Original Message -
From: Patrick Linskey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 9:56 AM
Subject: RE: Missing
Rahul-
I don't completely understand the question ... are you looking for
more possible use cases for the plugin?
I also agree with Patrick that it would be interesting to see if it
works with our own test cases. Have you tried replacing the enhancing
logic in
Hi,
Yes that was the intent - to gather more possible use cases for the
maven plugin.
I haven't tried that yet, but I can take it for a spin later tonight
after I finish work.
Cheers,
Rahul
Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
Rahul-
I don't completely understand the question ... are you looking
IIRC this sort of extension would only be allowed if the original
schema http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/persistence/orm; has explicitly
allowed extension. Historically, Sun has made it impossible to
extend their xml documents.
-dain
On Jan 18, 2007, at 6:16 AM, Kevin Sutter wrote:
Do we
