<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Entity Framework vote of no confidence in basic terms</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ronaldwidha.net/2009/05/08/entity-framework-vote-of-no-confidence-in-basic-terms/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ronaldwidha.net/2009/05/08/entity-framework-vote-of-no-confidence-in-basic-terms/</link>
	<description>podcast addict, believes in occam razor, software consultant</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:00:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.ronaldwidha.net/2009/05/08/entity-framework-vote-of-no-confidence-in-basic-terms/comment-page-1/#comment-313</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 09:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/Articles/Entity-Framework-vote-of-no-confidence-in-basic-terms.aspx#comment-313</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;@Hans indeed. The vote of no confidence is still relevant on the current release. However, if you have no other option but to use it (open source library isn&#039;t allowed in your project policy), you still are better off with it than plain ado.net sqlcommands.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Have a look at the upcoming release of Entity Framework (EF 4) on VS 2010/.Net 4.0. They seem to have addressed many of the concerns with POCO, Persistence Ignorance and Lazy Loading&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Hans indeed. The vote of no confidence is still relevant on the current release. However, if you have no other option but to use it (open source library isn&#8217;t allowed in your project policy), you still are better off with it than plain ado.net sqlcommands.</p>
<p>Have a look at the upcoming release of Entity Framework (EF 4) on VS 2010/.Net 4.0. They seem to have addressed many of the concerns with POCO, Persistence Ignorance and Lazy Loading</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.ronaldwidha.net/2009/05/08/entity-framework-vote-of-no-confidence-in-basic-terms/comment-page-1/#comment-312</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2009 13:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/Articles/Entity-Framework-vote-of-no-confidence-in-basic-terms.aspx#comment-312</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I have been using the EF in a production project in a limited capacity in order to suitability and most importantly its contribution to making my life easier.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Then I started doing reading and found the &quot;Vote of no confidence&quot;. The signatories to this seem to date back to June 2008. Its May 2009 now and the big question in mind is &quot;Is the vote of no confidence still valid?&quot; and hence I found myself here. So if anyone would like to elaborate please do.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If I look at the main topics I would probably say , with my limited exposure to EF and absence of an English major,  the arguments are all still valid. Can anyone tell me otherwise ?&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have been using the EF in a production project in a limited capacity in order to suitability and most importantly its contribution to making my life easier.</p>
<p>Then I started doing reading and found the &#8220;Vote of no confidence&#8221;. The signatories to this seem to date back to June 2008. Its May 2009 now and the big question in mind is &#8220;Is the vote of no confidence still valid?&#8221; and hence I found myself here. So if anyone would like to elaborate please do.</p>
<p>If I look at the main topics I would probably say , with my limited exposure to EF and absence of an English major,  the arguments are all still valid. Can anyone tell me otherwise ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

