Yes we need a factory somewhere but I don't know where yet. On 26 nov. 09, at 09:56, Amin Mohammed-Coleman wrote:
> Hi > > Ive updated the ProvidedId mapping test to include the changes you > made. Also added some more factory methods in the > ContainedInMapping. On a side note, I've made SearchMapping an > interface but wasn't sure how to create it, is there a class I can > use to construct a new search mapping? The > SearchConfigurationFromHibernateCore has a getProgrammaticMapping > method which returns a mapping that was set on the configuration > property. Anyway I can hold off on that and create the patch to > address 4 and 5. > > Cheers > Amin > > On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 6:33 AM, Emmanuel Bernard <emman...@hibernate.org > > wrote: > Hey, > Let's release Beta1 as it is except for 5 and 6 and take time to try > the API before refining it. > > On 25 nov. 09, at 17:29, Amin Mohammed-Coleman wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> Would it be possible get feedback with regards to points 2, 3 and >> 4. I can create patch to address those issues. >> >> Cheers >> Amin >> >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Emmanuel Bernard <ebern...@redhat.com >> > wrote: >> Hi Amin, >> I've committed your patch, thanks! >> There is still some work and questions remaining but that's a big >> coverage improvement. Now on to the doc to get the release out :) >> >> Here is my raw feedback >> >> 1. >> Interface vs class? >> Should we start using interfaces instead of classes, at least for >> SearchMapping. That way we could hide the getEntityDescriptor() >> method to the users. >> I think we need to start using superclasses or super interfaces to >> enforce the repeated contracts down to the tree of navigation? >> >> 2. >> Should the methods be on IndexedMapping not EntityMapping? >> - fullTextFilterDef >> - analyzerDiscriminator >> - similarity >> Question to Hardy and Sanne, do these concepts make sense on a non >> @indexed element? I can't remember how the parser behaves. >> >> I think these methods should be onn IndexedMapping rather than >> EntityMapping >> - boost >> - providedId >> >> The problem with this approach is that we would need to >> differentiate PropertyMapping and IndexedPropertyMapping. I am not >> sure this additional complexity is worth the extra help to the >> developer. >> >> 3. >> property(String name, ElementType type) should it be replaced with >> specific methods like? >> .field() => conflict with lucene field >> .getter() >> >> 4. >> Is date bridge exclusive to calendar bridge? I think the contract >> expresses that today. >> >> 5. >> ContainedInMapping does not contain the necessary upper methods. >> >> 6. >> I've updated the original ProvidedIdTest, Can you push the same >> changes to the programmatic version of the test. >> > > _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
