I would say .connection() falls in some of those categories and
should
only be used in very few cases (until we provide alternatives for the
important "patterns").
Should have said:
...only be used in very few cases (and even less when/if we provide
alternatives
for the important "patterns")
/max
/max
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: hibernate-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
>> [mailto:hibernate-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Max Rydahl
>> Andersen
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 3:01 PM
>> To: Christian Bauer; hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> Subject: Re: [hibernate-dev] Connection proxying
>>
>>
>>
>>>> The question was simply whether exposing the
>>>> Work/command APIs justify removal of the connection() method from the
>>>> perspective of using it for direct JDBC work. I do not know that
>>>>
>> answer
>>
>>>> to that. Unfortunately, I suspect it does not and that we will need
>>>>
>> to
>>
>>>> keep connection() around; but one can dream.
>>>>
>>> I'd keep connection() around and not deprecate it, no matter what
>>>
>> better
>>> solutions we find for the various use cases. We can hide it in the API
>>>
>>
>>
>>> documentation and like we do now, document the problems. It's just too
>>>
>>
>>
>>> useful to deprecate it. Also remember the public riots when JDO 1.0
>>> didn't have an easy way to get a JDBC connection.
>>>
>>
>> I agree this is also a reason/same reason to keep it, but I do think
>> (at
>>
>> least for now ;) that
>> @deprecate would make sense.
>>
>> Not @deprecate as in "it will be removed", but @deprecate as how it
>> is done for e.g. Date and some of its constructors.
>>
>> Those constructors are still around because they are usable in some
>> contexts but with @deprecate it is made explicit and documented
>> that they are 'bad' and what the consequences are for using it.
>>
>>
--
--
Max Rydahl Andersen
callto://max.rydahl.andersen
Hibernate
max(a)hibernate.org
http://hibernate.org
JBoss a division of Red Hat
max.andersen(a)jboss.com