if its a model specific to the phonebook who cares?-igorOn 11/2/06, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:i don't like this to much.if you don't want detaching then use another model.. (and not a DetachableModel that doesn't detach)
johanOn 11/2/06,
Geoff hendrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
i don't like this to much.if you don't want detaching then use another model.. (and not a DetachableModel that doesn't detach)johanOn 11/2/06,
Geoff hendrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think we can all make strong cases for situations in which detaching the ID makes sense, and depending on th
feel free to refactor, but i would do that in a different branch. the purpose of the phonebook is to demonstrate wicket+spring+database integration with as little overhead as possible.-igor
On 11/2/06, Geoff hendrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think we can all make strong cases for situations in w
I think we can all make strong cases for situations in which detaching the ID
makes sense, and depending on the needs of the app, also situations where just
serializing the POJO makes sense. Shades will work with either case.
What I would like, is the freedom to offer the deployer of the Phonebo
