So to be clear, I'm generally against adding destabilizing features that aren't required to meet the features we have chosen for the 1.2 release. Does OpenJPA use a runtime class transformer?

-dain

On Nov 6, 2006, at 10:26 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:

As I mentioned on IRC, I would prefer if we keep changes like this out of 1.2. From what I understand it is unnecessary since OpenJPA doesn't even use a transformer, so we are just destabilizing and breaking backwards compatibility.

Can you explain how this works? I don't see the code that is actually using this feature.

-dain

On Nov 5, 2006, at 12:54 AM, David Jencks wrote:

See GERONIMO-2541

In order for runtime class enhancement for jpa to have any chance of working, the persistence provider has to get started before much of anything else happens so it can install the bytecode transformer before any classes that need enhancement get loaded.

To support this I wrote a priority order loading feature for gbeans, see GERONIMO-2541. This is pretty simple and appears to work fine except it will prevent any pre-1.2 configurations from running on 1.2 servers: I have to write the priority for each gbeandata in the serialized gbeanstate. I don't know how to fix this: if anyone else does please speak up.

Runtime enhancement seems to work ok with this feature for simple apps that use ejbs and web apps but there are some situations in which I cannot get runtime enhancement to work because the classes are loaded when some gbeans are loaded before any gbeans are started. So far this has occurred with web services that use an enhanced class as a paramenter: I think that the axis 1 mapping info includes seriailzed class instances rather than the names of the classes involved.

So, is runtime enhancement for some jpa apps worth breaking backwards compatibility for configs? Can we do something to recognize both old and new config formats? If I don't hear anything against this in a few days (about 3) I'm going to go ahead and break backwards compatibility and commit this patch..... you are warned.

thanks
david jencks

Reply via email to