If there's no compile errors then it should not require any tests.
On 10/10/13 8:02 AM, "SuichII, Christopher" wrote:
>I went ahead and removed all setters from *JoinVOs this morning and
>played around in my environment. There were no compile errors since
>nobody called those setters, everything
I went ahead and removed all setters from *JoinVOs this morning and played
around in my environment. There were no compile errors since nobody called
those setters, everything seems to be working just fine and there aren't any
errors in any of the logs.
Does anyone have any suggestions on how t
Views are meant to be read only. So +1 for removing setters.
On 04-Oct-2013, at 10:59 PM, "SuichII, Christopher"
wrote:
> *JoinVOs are used to store entries from MySQL views, which are not editable.
> I think removing setters from the *JoinVOs may help avoid some potential
> confusion as sett
+1 on this. As Chris mentioned, the intention of *JoinVOs are
representation of MySQL views, which should not be editable after search.
-min
On 10/4/13 10:29 AM, "SuichII, Christopher" wrote:
>*JoinVOs are used to store entries from MySQL views, which are not
>editable. I think removing setters
Yeah, I agree with you, Chris. I think these setters should be removed.
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> Chris,
>
> Since I see no objections, why don't you test your idea and submit a patch?
>
> regards,
> Daan
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 7:29 PM, SuichII, Christopher
> wr
Chris,
Since I see no objections, why don't you test your idea and submit a patch?
regards,
Daan
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 7:29 PM, SuichII, Christopher
wrote:
> *JoinVOs are used to store entries from MySQL views, which are not editable.
> I think removing setters from the *JoinVOs may help avoi
