Behavior of NamingConvention for table names

[hastebrot]

Consider these JUnit tests: http://pastebin.com/Yh2LAy9G

With the current version of EBean the second test fails.

My intention is, that if schema and/or catalog is set in
NamingConvention, they are used as TableName if they are not set in
the @Table-annotation.

I changed AbstractNamingConvention#getTableName() to reflect this
changes.

http://pastebin.com/Rmf6xARq

So my question is: is it intented, that schema/catalog in
NamingConvention are completely ignored, if a @Table-annotation for
the beanclasses is given?

If so, I can use my own derived class from AbstractNamingConvention
and pass it into ServerConfig#setNamingConvention(), so there is not
problem.

Greetings from Hannover, Germany.

Benjamin

[Rob Bygrave]

I see your point (good testcases ... easy to see your point). 

I'll have to run this past Eddie to see what he thinks.

Cheers, Rob.

[edge]

well I think the NamingConvention should always have highest priority
and be able to ignore annotations. I think we initially had it working
like that and then there were some changes made that may have bypassed
the naming convention - it consider such behaviour as a bug.

[Rob Bygrave]

>> consider such behaviour as a bug.

Logged as BUG 334  - I have applied Benjamin's suggested code change as patch.