Login | Register
My pages Projects Community openCollabNet

Reply to message

* = Required fields
* Subject
* Body
Send reply to
Author (directly in email)
Please type the letters in the image above.

Original message

Author Martynas Jusevicius <martynas.jusevicius@gmail.com>
Full name Martynas Jusevicius <martynas.jusevicius@gmail.com>
Date 2007-11-09 04:05:20 PST
Message Hi,

I've run into limitations of current Criteria as well. For example,
when specifying non-trivial conditions for JOINs.

I don't know I there is any background for this, but I have a feeling
that Criteria would only be really flexible if based directly on
(simplified) grammar of SQL. Still it might turn out too complex :)


On Nov 9, 2007 12:37 PM, Hans Lellelid <hans at velum dot net> wrote:
> Hi Ron,
> Ron Rademaker wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I was wondering what the current plans and status is of criteria 2.
> > There are some guys here working with propel everyday and they're kinda
> > fed up with the current criteria. I think they'll be willing to put in
> > some hours testing and bugfixing criteria 2 as long as they got
> > something that already does some stuff right (and tackles the main
> > problems with current criteria).
> Yeah, I'm working right now on closing 1.3 bugs, but I'd like to resume
> work on Criteria2. I agree; current Criteria is lousy. There was a
> Criteria2 implementation that I did (and actually used for a Project)
> that was much more flexible, but the easy stuff got a lot more difficult
> ... so it was scrapped (it's actually in the criteria2-experiment branch
> if you want to look at it).
> We'll definitely be targeting 5.3 (w/ namespaces) for propel 2.
> As I think about it, I'm not entirely sure that it doesn't make sense to
> have a very core Criteria API and then provide different implementations
> of that which are suited to one type of work or another (e.g. keep
> something that looks like current Criteria for the very basic stuff).
> I believe I am going to start this time by coming up with a list of
> example queries that we'd like our Criteria to support -- and then we
> can start showing how it would look in various implementations and get a
> feel for how "easy" these systems will be to use. Since I already have
> a working application with the "criteria2-experiment" version, I can
> provide examples for that one which will illustrate the pros & cons of
> that approach.
> Actually, one thing that would be *very* helpful is if you could get
> some feedback from your developers on what they really need in the new
> Criteria -- e.g. which queries they are trying but cannot build in
> current version -- so that we can add those to the list.
> Thanks,
> Hans
> --------------------​--------------------​--------------------​---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@prop​el.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help at propel dot tigris dot org