Can someone please review this patch so that we can see about its inclusion
in the 2.0-beta branch as well?

Thanks,
Matthew

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Matthew T. Adams (JIRA) [mailto:jira@apache.org]
>Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 11:56 AM
>To: jdo-dev@db.apache.org
>Subject: [jira] Commented: (JDO-282) Add convenience methods
>to get persistent instance and detached instance from
>InstanceLifecycleEvent
>
>
>    [
>http://issues.apache.org/jira/brows...e=comments#acti
>on_12363452 ]
>
>Matthew T. Adams commented on JDO-282:
>--------------------------------------
>
>In case anyone were wondering, the reason for the "boolean
>isPreCallback" argument on the getPersistentInstance and
>getDetachedInstance is that the event enums do not indicate
>whether the event is a preDetach/preAttach or
>postDetach/postAttach.  The event enums for everything are
>only CREATE, LOAD, STORE, etc. instead of POST_CREATE,
>POST_LOAD, PRE_STORE, etc.
>
>* Should the enums be refactored to include PRE & POST prefixes, or
>* should we add a boolean field to the object indicating
>whether it's a pre- or post-event object, or
>* just do nothing and preserve the boolean isPreCallback
>arguments on the convenience methods?
>
> 
>detached instance from InstanceLifecycleEvent 
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>------------------------------------- 
>the persistent or detached instance in class
>InstanceLifecycleEvent depending upon whether the event object
>is given in the preDetach, postDetach, preAttach, or
>postAttach callbacks.  I propose adding two convenience
>methods that makes it obvious from the API which object the
>user is getting.
>
>--
>This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>-
>If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
>   http://issues.apache.org/jira/secur...nistrators.jspa
>-
>For more information on JIRA, see:
>   http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>
>

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]