SPI == service provider implementation (or something like that)
J2EE uses it extensively. In fact current package structure somewhat
mirrors the spec itself that consists of two packages -
javax.persistence and javax.persistence.spi. On Cayenne end we
implement interfaces from those two packages. So I thought that
mirroring spec package structure in our implementation would make sense.
This is not to say that we must use "SPI" (anything else that makes
sense is fine too), but I just wanted to point out that cayenne-jpa
project *is* the SPI.
Andrus
On Feb 17, 2006, at 5:34 PM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> Yes, I also don't know what SPI means. However, at least in the J2EE
> world, it seems more common to have "api" instead of "spi" el-api,
> jsf-api, servlet-api, etc.
>
> I'm not doing any of the work, but you might want to consider
> cayenne.jp-api and cayenne.jp-impl instead.
>
> On 2/17/06, Tore Halset <halse..vv.ntnu.no> wrote:
>> On Feb 16, 2006, at 23:00, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>>
>>> I did some refactoring to split the common JPA spec code from
>>> Cayenne-specific stuff. My (unproven) idea is that the resulting
>>> implementation will be more flexible and easy to share with others
>>> if we keep everything that does not depend on cayenne.jar in a
>>> separate package ("cayenne.jpa" and "cayenne.jpa.spi"). All things
>>> that require an import from cayenne.jar would go into
>>> "cayenne.cjpa".
>>
>> That makes sense. I did not understand all those acronyms :)
>>
>> - Tore.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Fri Feb 17 2006 - 17:49:53 EST