Hi Marco, Avi and all
I absolutly agree that it should stay simple and easy to use.
You should not see a difference between code that uses prevayler and code that doesn't use prevayler.
This is our dream, I think... Because it will be not simple to implement.
What I suggest for our first step is: Make the current implementation stable and valuable to use ...this would mean: write unit-tests for all the code and make a simple example to show how to use it.
We then have a stable base with tests which can then be extended in a second step.
Other thoughts, opinions?
I'm willing to help. I look foreward to use it for future web-applications. I think, Prevayler will be a very valuable (concerning time costs) solution for persistency.
Adrian
Marco Paga mail@marco-paga.de wrote:
In my mind that is something that is against the idea of prevalence. The programmer would have to think on more details. SPrevayler would become feature laden and that is something I don't want prevayler to be. In my mind it should be easy to use. You should not see a difference between code that uses prevayler and code that doesn't use prevayler.
Seconded !
-- Hannes
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org