In article
<8f985b960609090944x49a9a2bej27bafbabf9ced41..ail.gmail.com>,
"Mike Kienenberger" <mkienen..mail.com> wrote:
> On 9/9/06, Borut Bolčina <borut.bolcin..mail.com> wrote:
> > > > * -1 on the supported DB section - maybe replace it with a quick
> > > > summary of features, with a link to a "feature overview" page.
> > >
> > > I agree. The modeler is a great feature, but the supported DB makes
> > > Cayenne seem subordinate to the DB. I'd think that many people would
> > > choose their ORM before they choose their DB. (well, we did).
> >
> > I worked with WebObjects and EOF in the past and consider myself lucky to
> > know the technologies, but in real world databases rule not the persistent
> > frameworks and that is a fact we must face. I don't hate the SQL, but will
> > seize every opportunity not to use it, if I can use some persistence
> > framework. I think the majority of Java enterprise developers are somehow
> > preconditioned with legacy systems which include all sorts of databases.
> > Having a free mind in choosing every bit of technology is a rare luxury. I
> > would add an explanation text next to a list of supported databases. This
> > list can be a powerful factor for db oriented group of developers which are
> > presented with persistence framework.
>
> I am also -1 on the supported db section. I think it makes Cayenne
> look more limited than it is. Cayenne "supports" a generic JDBC
> driver. It supports certain databases better, but it supports all
> of them as far as I've determined. It's relatively trivial to add
> support for a new database.
I would say to the use marketing approach:
We support any database with a Java JDBC driver implementing
JSR-123737349, and JPA etc, etc.
Enhanced support for the following databases enable whizzy new features
X, Y, and Z.
-arturo
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sat Sep 09 2006 - 15:33:37 EDT