<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Verdana; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'>Good question.... "model" names means nothing to Teiid CF's (outside of our hidden preview vdb)<br><br>So maybe this makes a stronger case for exposing the CF's to Designer and assisting the Developers in "Clearly" setting the proper CF's, viewing CF's on multiple servers, transferring/copying CF's between servers.<br><br>Barry<br><br>----- Original Message -----<br>From: "John Verhaeg" <jverhaeg@redhat.com><br>To: rareddy@redhat.com<br>Cc: "teiid-dev" <teiid-dev@lists.jboss.org><br>Sent: Friday, April 9, 2010 12:42:37 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central<br>Subject: Re: [teiid-dev] Fwd: [teiid-designer-dev] Connection Factories<br><br>On Apr 9, 2010, at 12:26 PM, Ramesh Reddy wrote:<br><br>> No, I am not saying to include this. If we can export CF, that is one<br>> way to share. Or user1 can go the deploy directory of the container to<br>> grab the -ds.xml files.<br><br><br>Then I'm confused about the motivation behind the attempt to make VDBs more portable. I thought the idea was to make it easy to move a VDB from one environment to another, specifically thinking about promotion, like from dev to test to prod. If the CF names generally match the model names, how would, say, a prod admin ever know the appropriate connector to assign the CF to? If this info still has to be passed around verbally or via some other exported entity, then why are we taking it out of the VDB in the first place?<br><br>Thanks,<br><br>JPAV<br><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>teiid-dev mailing list<br>teiid-dev@lists.jboss.org<br>https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/teiid-dev<br></div></body></html>