On Oct 20, 2007, at 4:40 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
> We've gone back and forth on this a few times now. As long as the
> conversation is still productive, I don't mind following it.
> Unfortunately,
> I don't have as great an understanding of the internals as you do,
> so if
> we're just rehashing old ground, we can agree to disagree. What
> I'd just
> hate to see is if we continue to do things the way we have been out
> of force
> of habit, rather than because it's the best way to do it. I see a
> lot of
> room for improvement and based on graph theory, can see how it
> could be
> solved. I haven't ascertained from the Cayenne code how disruptive
> a change
> it would be, however.
Yes, there seems to be a difference in approach to managing object
graphs... I feel like I do not understand many of your examples
simply cause I've been doing things differently, so I never thought
that certain things are actually problematic.
So I suspect that there is still misunderstanding on my end as to why
you are suggesting some of these changes. Can somebody else following
this discussion maybe point out what I am missing when defending the
existing design?
Andrus
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sat Oct 20 2007 - 13:55:29 EDT