RE: [eclipselink-dev] FW: Rename query hint return-shared to read-only

[MICHAEL.KEITH@xxxxxxxxxx]

This is my concern as well. I agree that "return-shared" doesn't indicate 
very much to the user, but I would be concerned that "read-only" tells the 
user that the object will be guaranteed to be read-only, not that they must
agree to a read-only contract. Problem is that I don't really have any better 
ideas. I don't have a problem with a longer name, though, if someone came up
with a slightly longer version that better described it.

e.g. 
  return-read-only-entities-that-users-must-never-change

Ok, not that long...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: TOM.WARE@xxxxxxxxxx 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 2:18 PM
> To: Dev mailing list for Eclipse Persistence Services
> Subject: Re: [eclipselink-dev] FW: Rename query hint return-shared to
> read-only
> 
> 
> Will the "read-only" entity actually be read-only.  i.e. Can 
> the customer mess 
> up their shared cache by accidentally modifying this object?  
> I assume so.  That 
> doesn't necessarily mean I object to the change, but it does 
> mean we should be 
> careful how we document this.
> 
> JAMES.SUTHERLAND@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > Any comments?
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > *From:* DOUGLAS.CLARKE@xxxxxxxxxx
> > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 13, 2008 12:27 PM
> > *To:* shaun.smith@xxxxxxxxxx; JAMES.SUTHERLAND@xxxxxxxxxx
> > *Cc:* PETER.KROGH@xxxxxxxxxx
> > *Subject:* RE: Rename query hint return-shared to read-only
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > I like read-only as well but I believe it was rejected in 
> the initial 
> > review. I believe a wider audience of the JPA development 
> team would be 
> > required to confirm this and the discussion around this 
> issue. Having 
> > this discussed on the eclipselink-dev mailing list would be good.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > I added my thoughts to the bug.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Doug
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > *From:* shaun.smith@xxxxxxxxxx
> > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 13, 2008 11:37 AM
> > *To:* JAMES.SUTHERLAND@xxxxxxxxxx
> > *Cc:* DOUGLAS.CLARKE@xxxxxxxxxx; PETER.KROGH@xxxxxxxxxx
> > *Subject:* Re: Rename query hint return-shared to read-only
> > 
> > Works for me.
> > 
> >     Shaun
> > 
> > JAMES.SUTHERLAND@xxxxxxxxxx 
> <mailto:JAMES.SUTHERLAND@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > I logged bug,
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=231836
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > To have the query hint "return-shared" to "read-only", as 
> read-only is a 
> > better understood concept from the user's perspective.  It 
> also matches 
> > our query, descriptor and unit of work read-only setting 
> and matches 
> > other JPA products terminology.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >                         It is also a more understandable 
> flag to use on 
> > performance benchmarks, and easier to explain.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > I will make the change if you don't have any issues.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > eclipselink-dev mailing list
> > eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev
> _______________________________________________
> eclipselink-dev mailing list
> eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev
>