Re: JPA crossroads

From: Andrus Adamchik (andru..bjectstyle.org)
Date: Thu Apr 09 2009 - 02:07:13 EDT

  • Next message: Aristedes Maniatis: "Re: JPA crossroads"

    I.e. the soul searching part of this discussion is a separate issue of
    Cayenne direction. Excluding provider from the release is a legal
    prerequisite for 3.0 final.

    Andrus

    On Apr 9, 2009, at 9:03 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:

    > What needs to be moved out is "cayenne-jpa-unpublished" (and the
    > corresponding itest modules), NOT the lifecycle events or EJBQL
    > stuff in "cayenne-jdk1.5-unpublished" - these we will keep. As I
    > mentioned before we are legally prohibited by the JSR license
    > agreement from releasing non-compliant provider as a final release.
    > So we can't make 3.0-final that includes classes from "cayenne-jpa-
    > unpublished". This was the driving factor behind this discussion.
    > Having to support API compliance of the backend is also a
    > consideration, albeit minor for now.
    >
    > Andrus
    >
    >
    > On Apr 9, 2009, at 2:57 AM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
    >> On 09/04/2009, at 7:26 AM, Robert Zeigler wrote:
    >>
    >>> I've always considered specs like JPA to be, well, a bit of a pipe
    >>> dream. Once upon a time, I thought I cared about the ability to
    >>> switch between persistence providers. But then I realized that,
    >>> no, actually, I really don't. Persistence is an area where you
    >>> choose a provider based on differences from rather than
    >>> similarities to other providers. Even having an opportunity last
    >>> year to do a significant amount of work with a (largely) JPA shop
    >>> didn't really change my perspective; they still found areas where
    >>> the spec wasn't enough, where they had to lean on hibernate-
    >>> specific features. At that point, the "happy promise" of "switch
    >>> providers anytime" is broken. So, I'm with Andrus: let's not be
    >>> afraid to adopt /good/ ideas in other frameworks, but also forge
    >>> ahead where we're strong.
    >>
    >> I'm still unsure why anything has to be done about this now within
    >> Cayenne. Yes, there is a 80% JPA solution in there. Many people use
    >> bits of it: lifecycle events, EJBQL, etc
    >>
    >> I'm not clear what would be removed or why anything would be
    >> removed. What not just change the documentation to reflect the fact
    >> that the JPA is not a current goal but there are plenty of parts of
    >> it which are implemented which will make migration from other
    >> frameworks simpler (but not automatic). For example, we have
    >> lifecycle events which match the JPA but we agree they aren't all
    >> the ideal. So we could add more, but still leave those existing
    >> hooks in place for people coming from a tool where they are
    >> supported and where they don't want to rewrite too much code.
    >>
    >> JPA is a useful marketing moniker. It will help (sometimes) get
    >> Cayenne across the line with management in some organisations just
    >> by having a section of the docs that discusses it, even if
    >> ultimately the development team don't use any part of it.
    >>
    >> JPA pages on the Cayenne site make up 2.14% of page views (not
    >> including javadocs) but are less likely than other pages on the
    >> site to be the last page a reader looks at before leaving (that is,
    >> they tend to go on to read other parts of the site).
    >>
    >>
    >> Ari Maniatis
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> -------------------------->
    >> ish
    >> http://www.ish.com.au
    >> Level 1, 30 Wilson Street Newtown 2042 Australia
    >> phone +61 2 9550 5001 fax +61 2 9550 4001
    >> GPG fingerprint CBFB 84B4 738D 4E87 5E5C 5EFA EF6A 7D2E 3E49 102A
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Apr 09 2009 - 02:07:56 EDT