Re: [VOTE] Release Apache JDO 2.2

the directions at http://wiki.apache.org/jdo/ReleaseTesting2dot2 for downloading and testing. Please test and vote. Voting will close at midnight PDT Friday, October 17. -- Michelle cheers Christian -- Christian Ernst Software Engineer Tel: +49-40-60990 338 Fax: +49-40-60990 113 EMail: [EMAIL

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache JDO 2.1.1

/browse/JDO-600 * http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-601 Please test and vote. Voting will close at noon PDT Tuesday, August 5. -- Michelle cheers Christian -- Christian Ernst Software Engineer Tel: +49-40-60990 338 Fax: +49-40-60990 113 EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Versant GmbH

Re: Rename property PersistenceUnitName to Name

aName) to the PersistenceManagerFactory. cheers Christian -- Christian Ernst Software Engineer Tel: +49-40-60990 338 Fax: +49-40-60990 113 EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Versant GmbH Wiesenkamp 22b 22359 Hamburg Germany Think Outside the Grid! http://www.versant.com Versant GmbH is incorporated

Named PM in addition to named PMF

Hi JDO friends ! Following the discussion about named PMF, i would like to suggest to add also a name to PM. I think there are cases where it would be helpful to have a named PM. For Example: A named PM allows to track its PM / TXN via logging up to the Database Server ( assuming the Database

Re: Advisory: JDO2 Annotation Metadata

one JDO implementation to others If both JDO and EJB3/JPA annotations are used in the same class we need to choose between: +1 * JDO annotations will override EJB3/JPA annotations +1 -- Regards, Christian Ernst Versant GmbH, European Headquarters Wiesenkamp 22b, 22359 Hamburg, Germany

Re: JDO2 Annotations

Hi JDO folks, The Solution we want to propose is based on 2. 1. JDO2 should define an own clear set of Annotations * JDO2 Annotations are splitted in two seperated sets with two indipendent packages * Persistence JDO2 Annotation are defined based on the *.jdo definition * Mapping

[jira] Updated: (JDO-395) org.apache.jdo.tck.lifecycle.NontransactionalWriteTest.conflictingUpdate() don't cleanup correctly in case of an Exception

[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-395?page=all ] Christian Ernst updated JDO-395: Attachment: NontransactionalWriteTest.java.patch Patch org.apache.jdo.tck.lifecycle.NontransactionalWriteTest.conflictingUpdate() don't cleanup correctly

[jira] Created: (JDO-395) org.apache.jdo.tck.lifecycle.NontransactionalWriteTest.conflictingUpdate() don't cleanup correctly in case of an Exception

URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-395 Project: JDO Issue Type: Bug Components: tck20 Affects Versions: JDO 2 final Reporter: Christian Ernst Priority: Minor Attachments: NontransactionalWriteTest.java.patch

[jira] Created: (JDO-394) org.apache.jdo.tck.api.persistencemanagerfactory.GetPersistenceManager.test() and org.apache.jdo.tck.api.persistencemanagerfactory.GetPersistenceManagerForUser.test() don't c

final Reporter: Christian Ernst Priority: Minor org.apache.jdo.tck.api.persistencemanagerfactory.GetPersistenceManager.test() and org.apache.jdo.tck.api.persistencemanagerfactory.GetPersistenceManagerForUser.test() don't close PMF correctly and this can cause other

[jira] Created: (JDO-362) NontransactionalWriteOptimisticRollback and other NontransactionalWriteTest fail because OID is null.

Project: JDO Type: Bug Components: tck20 Reporter: Christian Ernst In the super class of all NontransactionalWriteTest's : org.apache.jdo.tck.lifecycle.NontransactionalWriteTestcreateAndModifyVersionedPCPoint.createAndModifyVersionedPCPoint() an OID is obtained for a transient Instance

TCK JDOQL Operator Test per Persistent Type

Hi JDO Folks ! Has there been any considarations to split up the JDOQL Operator Test to have one TestMethod per Persistent Type ? For Example: org.apache.jdo.tck.query.jdoql.operators.BinaryAddition to have testInteger testCharacter testBigDecimal I think this would help anyone alot,

Re: VOTE: Release JDO 2.0 specification

Hi Craig, +1 cheers Christian Craig L Russell wrote: You can preview the spec at http://access1.sun.com/jdo/private. This is the last specification vote. Please have your votes cast by Friday 24-Feb-2006. This vote is to submit the spec to the JCP for the final approval of the JSR. We

package.jdo Metadata for Company PC test classes

Hi Is there a reason why test/datastoreidentity/org/apache/jdo/tck/pc/company/package.jdo don't define any persistence-capable-superclass but test/datastoreidentity/org/apache/jdo/tck/pc/company/package.jdo defines them correctly ? Is this not required for both scenario's ? cheers Christian

Re: package.jdo Metadata for Company PC test classes

Sorry, should be: test/datastoreidentity/org/apache/jdo/tck/pc/company/package.jdo don't define any persistence-capable-superclass but 'test/applicationidentity/org/apache/jdo/tck/pc/company/package.jdo' defines them correctly ? Is this not required for both scenario's ? cheers Christian

JDO TCK 20 Metadata Changes in 330689

Hy ! I have a question related to the Metadata changes done in 330689 for the PC Classes used for Collection Field tests. Why have the variants for Collection fields with element-type=java.lang.Object or element-type=SimpleInterface been changed to element-type=SimpleClass ( concrete PC class )

JDO 2 TCK - Metadata of org.apache.jdo.tck.pc fieldtypes.TypeCollections.jdo possible incorrect

Hy ! We had a look on the JDO TCK 2.0 Tests. It looks like the JDO metadata for the non Map Collection Classes isn't correct aswell. For Example: VectorCollections.jdo has defined: field name=VectorOfObject0 collection element-type=org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.fieldtypes.SimpleClass /collection