You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ofbiz.apache.org by Erwan de FERRIERES <er...@nereide.fr> on 2010/04/06 12:08:22 UTC

Re: svn commit: r930321 - /ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml

Le 02/04/2010 18:47, doogie@apache.org a écrit :
> Author: doogie
> Date: Fri Apr  2 16:47:22 2010
> New Revision: 930321
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=930321&view=rev
> Log:
> Add OrderItem relation on OrderItemGroup.
>
> Modified:
>      ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>
> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml?rev=930321&r1=930320&r2=930321&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml (original)
> +++ ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml Fri Apr  2 16:47:22 2010
> @@ -760,6 +760,10 @@ under the License.
>           <field name="groupName" type="name"></field>
>           <prim-key field="orderId"/>
>           <prim-key field="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
> +<relation type="many" rel-entity-name="OrderItem">
> +<key-map field-name="orderId"/>
> +<key-map field-name="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
> +</relation>
>           <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDERITMGRP_HDR" rel-entity-name="OrderHeader">
>               <key-map field-name="orderId"/>
>           </relation>
>
>
>

Why adding this relation as it is automatically created with this 
relation in OrderItem entity ?
<relation type="one" fk-name="ORDER_ITEM_ITGRP" 
rel-entity-name="OrderItemGroup">
<key-map field-name="orderId"/>
<key-map field-name="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
</relation>



-- 
Erwan de FERRIERES
www.nereide.biz

Re: svn commit: r930321 - /ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml

Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
Scott Gray wrote:
> On 8/04/2010, at 3:26 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
> 
>> On 6/04/2010, at 7:48 AM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>
>>> Erwan de FERRIERES wrote:
>>>> Le 02/04/2010 18:47, doogie@apache.org a écrit :
>>>>> Author: doogie
>>>>> Date: Fri Apr  2 16:47:22 2010
>>>>> New Revision: 930321
>>>>>
>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=930321&view=rev
>>>>> Log:
>>>>> Add OrderItem relation on OrderItemGroup.
>>>>>
>>>>> Modified:
>>>>>    ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>>>>>
>>>>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>>>>> URL:
>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml?rev=930321&r1=930320&r2=930321&view=diff
>>>>>
>>>>> ==============================================================================
>>>>>
>>>>> --- ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml (original)
>>>>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml Fri Apr 
>>>>> 2 16:47:22 2010
>>>>> @@ -760,6 +760,10 @@ under the License.
>>>>>         <field name="groupName" type="name"></field>
>>>>>         <prim-key field="orderId"/>
>>>>>         <prim-key field="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
>>>>> +<relation type="many" rel-entity-name="OrderItem">
>>>>> +<key-map field-name="orderId"/>
>>>>> +<key-map field-name="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
>>>>> +</relation>
>>>>>         <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDERITMGRP_HDR"
>>>>> rel-entity-name="OrderHeader">
>>>>>             <key-map field-name="orderId"/>
>>>>>         </relation>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Why adding this relation as it is automatically created with this
>>>> relation in OrderItem entity ?
>>>> <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDER_ITEM_ITGRP"
>>>> rel-entity-name="OrderItemGroup">
>>>> <key-map field-name="orderId"/>
>>>> <key-map field-name="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
>>>> </relation>
>>> Let me check when I get back to work.  Might end up removing this commit.
> 
> Are you on an extended holiday?

No, thanks for reminding me.  It's still on my list.


Re: svn commit: r930321 - /ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml

Posted by Scott Gray <sc...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
On 8/04/2010, at 3:26 PM, Scott Gray wrote:

> On 6/04/2010, at 7:48 AM, Adam Heath wrote:
> 
>> Erwan de FERRIERES wrote:
>>> Le 02/04/2010 18:47, doogie@apache.org a écrit :
>>>> Author: doogie
>>>> Date: Fri Apr  2 16:47:22 2010
>>>> New Revision: 930321
>>>> 
>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=930321&view=rev
>>>> Log:
>>>> Add OrderItem relation on OrderItemGroup.
>>>> 
>>>> Modified:
>>>>    ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>>>> 
>>>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>>>> URL:
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml?rev=930321&r1=930320&r2=930321&view=diff
>>>> 
>>>> ==============================================================================
>>>> 
>>>> --- ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml (original)
>>>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml Fri Apr 
>>>> 2 16:47:22 2010
>>>> @@ -760,6 +760,10 @@ under the License.
>>>>         <field name="groupName" type="name"></field>
>>>>         <prim-key field="orderId"/>
>>>>         <prim-key field="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
>>>> +<relation type="many" rel-entity-name="OrderItem">
>>>> +<key-map field-name="orderId"/>
>>>> +<key-map field-name="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
>>>> +</relation>
>>>>         <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDERITMGRP_HDR"
>>>> rel-entity-name="OrderHeader">
>>>>             <key-map field-name="orderId"/>
>>>>         </relation>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Why adding this relation as it is automatically created with this
>>> relation in OrderItem entity ?
>>> <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDER_ITEM_ITGRP"
>>> rel-entity-name="OrderItemGroup">
>>> <key-map field-name="orderId"/>
>>> <key-map field-name="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
>>> </relation>
>> 
>> Let me check when I get back to work.  Might end up removing this commit.

Are you on an extended holiday?

> 
> [        ModelReader.java:386:INFO ] Entity [org.ofbiz.order.order:OrderItemGroup] already has identical relationship to entity [OrderItem] title []; would auto-create: type [many] and fields [orderId,orderItemGroupSeqId]
> 
> 


Re: svn commit: r930321 - /ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml

Posted by Scott Gray <sc...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
On 6/04/2010, at 7:48 AM, Adam Heath wrote:

> Erwan de FERRIERES wrote:
>> Le 02/04/2010 18:47, doogie@apache.org a écrit :
>>> Author: doogie
>>> Date: Fri Apr  2 16:47:22 2010
>>> New Revision: 930321
>>> 
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=930321&view=rev
>>> Log:
>>> Add OrderItem relation on OrderItemGroup.
>>> 
>>> Modified:
>>>     ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>>> 
>>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>>> URL:
>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml?rev=930321&r1=930320&r2=930321&view=diff
>>> 
>>> ==============================================================================
>>> 
>>> --- ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml (original)
>>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml Fri Apr 
>>> 2 16:47:22 2010
>>> @@ -760,6 +760,10 @@ under the License.
>>>          <field name="groupName" type="name"></field>
>>>          <prim-key field="orderId"/>
>>>          <prim-key field="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
>>> +<relation type="many" rel-entity-name="OrderItem">
>>> +<key-map field-name="orderId"/>
>>> +<key-map field-name="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
>>> +</relation>
>>>          <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDERITMGRP_HDR"
>>> rel-entity-name="OrderHeader">
>>>              <key-map field-name="orderId"/>
>>>          </relation>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> Why adding this relation as it is automatically created with this
>> relation in OrderItem entity ?
>> <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDER_ITEM_ITGRP"
>> rel-entity-name="OrderItemGroup">
>> <key-map field-name="orderId"/>
>> <key-map field-name="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
>> </relation>
> 
> Let me check when I get back to work.  Might end up removing this commit.

[        ModelReader.java:386:INFO ] Entity [org.ofbiz.order.order:OrderItemGroup] already has identical relationship to entity [OrderItem] title []; would auto-create: type [many] and fields [orderId,orderItemGroupSeqId]



Re: svn commit: r930321 - /ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml

Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
Erwan de FERRIERES wrote:
> Le 02/04/2010 18:47, doogie@apache.org a écrit :
>> Author: doogie
>> Date: Fri Apr  2 16:47:22 2010
>> New Revision: 930321
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=930321&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Add OrderItem relation on OrderItemGroup.
>>
>> Modified:
>>      ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>>
>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>> URL:
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml?rev=930321&r1=930320&r2=930321&view=diff
>>
>> ==============================================================================
>>
>> --- ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml (original)
>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml Fri Apr 
>> 2 16:47:22 2010
>> @@ -760,6 +760,10 @@ under the License.
>>           <field name="groupName" type="name"></field>
>>           <prim-key field="orderId"/>
>>           <prim-key field="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
>> +<relation type="many" rel-entity-name="OrderItem">
>> +<key-map field-name="orderId"/>
>> +<key-map field-name="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
>> +</relation>
>>           <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDERITMGRP_HDR"
>> rel-entity-name="OrderHeader">
>>               <key-map field-name="orderId"/>
>>           </relation>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> Why adding this relation as it is automatically created with this
> relation in OrderItem entity ?
> <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDER_ITEM_ITGRP"
> rel-entity-name="OrderItemGroup">
> <key-map field-name="orderId"/>
> <key-map field-name="orderItemGroupSeqId"/>
> </relation>

Let me check when I get back to work.  Might end up removing this commit.