Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Hi Antoine,
thank you for your post - you're welcome.
Unfortunately MySQL Workbench has no idea of behaviours as this is related to
doctrine and not to MySQL.
As I implemented the *_ns table names (as you may plead) this was just for my
personal purpose, but this isn't a solution for behaviours in general, because
you
can combine behaviours and/or nest them which is impossible to implement by
adding
small pieces like *_ns.
Johannes
Original comment by johannes...@gmail.com
on 14 Nov 2009 at 11:18
Hi Johannes,
Thanks for your quick reply.
You're completely right about the behaviours. Therefore, I'm wondering if
implementing a
specific syntax for the tables comments would be a good idea.
We could use something like the following directly in the tables comment fields:
{doctrine}
actAs:
Timestampable:
{/doctrine}
It's kind of a hack and for sure not standard in WB, but this may bring
developers (like me /
us) relying only on the graphical schema when updating their database structure
and doctrine
behaviors, rather than having to implement specific hacks on the Doctrine side.
What do you think ?
Antoine
Original comment by antoine....@gmail.com
on 14 Nov 2009 at 11:46
please check this version of the plugin and tell me if this works for you.
add the following structure to your table comment:
{doctrine:actAs}
actAs:
Timestampable:
NestedSet:
..
{/doctrine:actAs}
Please keep an eye on the spaces - the "actAs:" line has 2 leading spaces.
Johannes
Original comment by johannes...@gmail.com
on 14 Nov 2009 at 1:00
Attachments:
Hi Johannes,
That was fast ! I just had the time to install wb & the doctrine plugin on my
home pc.
Your update seems to work just fine for me. I think it's worth publishing &
documenting it.
Tell me if I can be of any help.
Antoine
Original comment by antoine....@gmail.com
on 14 Nov 2009 at 6:53
feature uploaded to SVN
Original comment by johannes...@gmail.com
on 15 Nov 2009 at 11:13
Thanks !
Original comment by antoine....@gmail.com
on 15 Nov 2009 at 12:39
Original comment by johannes...@gmail.com
on 17 Nov 2009 at 9:47
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
antoine....@gmail.com
on 11 Nov 2009 at 1:40