re DataObjectAccessException: this class extends RuntimeException, and is solely
thrown in FieldMolder.setValue(). As it is a derived from RunTimeException,
callers of FieldMolder.setValue() do not have to catch this particular
exception. Changing this class to extend CastorException seems to be quite rsiky
to me .. as we are steadily approaching the 0.9.6 release.
Instead, I'd rather replace the
public DataObjectAccessException( String message, Throwable except )
super( message, except);
with public DataObjectAccessException( String message, Throwable except )
super( message /*, except */);
for the time being, until we agree on a better approach.
Er; assuming that the object getting values set on it may well be locked, or at
the very least in a transaction, I find it difficult to believe that we don't
want to catch and handle this.
> Er; assuming that the object getting values set on it may well be
> locked, or at the very least in a transaction, I find it difficult
> to believe that we don't want to catch and handle this.
Gregory, I thinkyou are 100% right, but chnaging all occurences where
FieldMolder.setValue() is called does not look like an option to me at this
point of time. Unless you feel like pushing the 0.9.6 release well after New
Year. Look, it's been broken apparently, but we are not making it worse .. .
OK, open a separate bug and later it; we'll do the API change post-release.