On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 09:08:39PM +0100, jonhattan wrote:
> So I have two questions.
> first is, shouldn't it work with the last class definition I've shown?
No, RelatedJoin was designed to be used symmetrically; you have to have
two RelatedJoins pointing to each other.
> second, could SQLObject create the table on first RelatedJoin it found,
> instead of on the one resulting on applying the alphabetical sort?
Currently no, but you can try to extend SQLObject. Patches (that work)
will be gladly accepted.
Oleg Broytmann http://phd.pp.ru/ phd@...
Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN.