David Patrick

@slindberg, Thanks for the quick and thorough response. The `belongsTo` worked before I switched over to Fragments; both during the old ED version and while I was coercing `DS.EmbeddedRecordsMixin` to...

Quick question.... Shouldn't the default case for a fragment's relationship be such that there can't be an inverse? For instance.... why should the Product care about which Purchases it may,...

Personally, I think that the real "concession" happened when people decided that inverse relationships were a good thing. Seems like a circular-dependency to me (hence the difficulty in managing it)....

I'm also interested in the progress of this library. Are there any plans for continued work? Are there any significant problems you ran into that prevent further progress? Thanks.

Good to hear. I for one would be very excited to get this working for my App. Would love to contribute if I can find the time.

I just checked out EPF and built it from the master branch yesterday. I agree that I shouldn't _have_ to specify an explicit inverse in this case. On another model,...

Which payload? A GET response? The POST/PUT requests?

Seems like the explicit inverse doesn't break "findById" requests.... I'll get the responses now.

Here's a response for a single item: ``` { "race": { "doc_meta": { "created":1405024824835, "updated":1405029317207, "created_by":"53bd768f970000004057a9f4" }, "id":"53befa38970000ff7257aa18", "name":"qwe", "description":"qwe", "abilities": [{ "ability":"qwe", "description":"qwe" }], "module_id":"53bef0b0970000771f57aa17" } } ```

Here is a _very_ truncated response from the server during a `@session.query 'race'`: ``` { "races": [{ "doc_meta": { "created":1377814485629, "updated":1394501556095, "created_by":"50c923c6e4b0add373778525" }, "id":"50ea5298e4b0c6e36078e0aa", "name":"Android", "description":"Androids...", "abilities": [{ "ability":"Recharge", "description":"During..."...