Re: Tapestry integration options

From: Cris Daniluk (cris.danilu..mail.com)
Date: Tue May 03 2005 - 10:15:11 EDT

Next message: Mike Kienenberger: "Re: unit testing Cayenne objects"

Previous message: Cris Daniluk: "Re: unit testing Cayenne objects"
In reply to: Gentry, Michael \(Contractor\): "RE: Tapestry integration options"
Next in thread: Gentry, Michael \(Contractor\): "RE: Tapestry integration options"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> That's exactly why we want nested DataContexts. :-)
>
> You do your wizard/multi-step process in a nested DataContext and if
> they finish the last step, you can commit it all. If they run off
> elsewhere, no harm done and it falls out.
>
I for one am going to have a lot of unnecessary workarounds and dead
code when nested contexts are ready :)

Cris

Next message: Mike Kienenberger: "Re: unit testing Cayenne objects"
Previous message: Cris Daniluk: "Re: unit testing Cayenne objects"
In reply to: Gentry, Michael \(Contractor\): "RE: Tapestry integration options"
Next in thread: Gentry, Michael \(Contractor\): "RE: Tapestry integration options"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue May 03 2005 - 10:15:12 EDT