+1 for the last

- Romain


2012/7/9 Arne Limburg <[email protected]>

> Ihmo we should rename the api to deltaspike-tx-module-api and rename the
> PersistenceStrategy to TransactionStrategy
> Also it looks strange, the name of the impl should be left as it is. Maybe
> we should add an empty impl to the tx-module and an empty api to the JPA
> module?
>
> Cheers,
> Arne
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Jason Porter [mailto:[email protected]]
> Gesendet: Montag, 9. Juli 2012 18:54
> An: [email protected]
> Betreff: Re: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219]
> @Transactional
>
> I'm fine renaming things for v0.3 as we really haven't done any JPA
> related stuff yet.
>
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Gerhard Petracek <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > @ mark:
> > that's more or less what we discussed at [1].
> >
> > regards,
> > gerhard
> >
> > [1] http://s.apache.org/3pO
> >
> >
> >
> > 2012/7/9 Arne Limburg <[email protected]>
> >
> > > For api it's fine,
> > > and then we have two impl modules, JPA and JTA?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Arne
> > >
> > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 8. Juli 2012 21:37
> > > An: [email protected]; Mark Struberg
> > > Betreff: Re: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219]
> > > @Transactional
> > >
> > > sounds fine
> > >
> > > - Romain
> > >
> > >
> > > 2012/7/8 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > > maybe we should just rename the jpa module to tx?
> > > >
> > > > There is no single import of any javax.persistence in
> > > > deltaspike-jpa-api yet.
> > > >
> > > > LieGrue,
> > > > strub
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: Arne Limburg <[email protected]>
> > > > > To: "[email protected]" <
> > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > Cc:
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 8:39 PM
> > > > > Subject: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219]
> > > > @Transactional
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, sounds good.
> > > > > The impl of that module could contain the JTA stuff. And the JPA
> > > > > module
> > > > would
> > > > > contain the resource local stuff. Everybody that does not need
> > > > > the JTA
> > > > then
> > > > > could just use the tx-api and the JPA api and impl.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Arne
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > > > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 8. Juli 2012 20:29
> > > > > An: [email protected]
> > > > > Betreff: Re: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219]
> > > > @Transactional
> > > > >
> > > > > i thought the same, JTA shouldn't depend on JPA. @Transactional
> > > > > should
> > > > be in
> > > > > a tx module then JPA could use it.
> > > > >
> > > > > wdyt?
> > > > >
> > > > > - Romain
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2012/7/8 Arne Limburg <[email protected]>
> > > > >
> > > > >>  OK, but I am still not sure where to split it. While
> > > > >> implementing this, I got the feeling, that the @Transactional
> > > > >> stuff should completely move out of the JPA module. It feeled
> > > > >> quite strange that the JTA module depends on the JPA module...
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  I think, I'll push my stuff right after the 0.3 release and
> > > > >> than we  can discuss this at the code-base.
> > > > >>  Maybe I should put all into the JPA module and we split it
> > > > >> after agreeing to a module structure?
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  Cheers,
> > > > >>  Arne
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > > > >>  Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > > >>  Gesendet: Sonntag, 8. Juli 2012 17:48
> > > > >>  An: [email protected]; Mark Struberg
> > > > >>  Betreff: Re: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219]
> > > > >> @Transactional
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  +1
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  - Romain
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  2012/7/8 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  > +1 for JTA module.
> > > > >>  >
> > > > >>  > LieGrue,
> > > > >>  > strub
> > > > >>  >
> > > > >>  >
> > > > >>  >
> > > > >>  > ----- Original Message -----  > > From: Arne Limburg
> > > > >> <[email protected]>  > > To:
> > > > >> "[email protected]" <  >
> > > > >> [email protected]>
> > > > >>  > > Cc:
> > > > >>  > > Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 5:47 PM  > > Subject: AW:
> > > > >> [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219]  > > @Transactional
> > > > >> > >  > > Hi,
> > > > >> > > I startet implementing it that way, but I stumbled over
> > > > >> > > another
> > > > > issue:
> > > > >>  > > We get a dependency to the JTA spec and the EJB spec that
> way.
> > > > >> So
> > > > >
> > > > >>  > > our
> > > > >>  > JPA module
> > > > >>  > > only would work with this apis in the classpath.
> > > > >>  > > Do we accept this or are we back on a JTA module?
> > > > >>  > >
> > > > >>  > > Cheers,
> > > > >>  > > Arne
> > > > >>  > >
> > > > >>  > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----  > > Von: Romain
> > > > >> Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]]  > > Gesendet:
> > > > >> Donnerstag, 5. Juli
> > > > >> 2012 15:07  > > An: [email protected]
> > > > >>  > > Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219]
> > > > >> > > @Transactional  > >  > > if it works fine with CMT +1  > >
> > > > >> > > well let's have a try, we'll fix it if it is not enough
> > > > > ;)
> > > > >>  > >
> > > > >>  > > - Romain
> > > > >>  > >
> > > > >>  > >
> > > > >>  > > 2012/7/5 Pete Muir <[email protected]>  > >  > >>  In Seam
> > > > >> 2
> > > > >> we:
> > > > >>  > >>
> > > > >>  > >>  * checked if UT was available in JNDI, and used it if it
> > > > > were
> > > > >>  > >>  * checked if there was a CMT transaction, and used it
> > > > >> (IIRC
> > > > > this
> > > > >>  > >> wwas  to work around abug)  > >>  * otherwise tried to
> > > > >> use a resource local transaction (e.g.
> > > > > from
> > > > >>  > >>  Hibernate)
> > > > >>  > >>  * allowed the user to override and specify one strategy
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >>  > >>  In Seam 3 we did the same.
> > > > >>  > >>
> > > > >>  > >>  So I like option 1.
> > > > >>  > >>
> > > > >>  > >>  On 5 Jul 2012, at 10:03, Arne Limburg wrote:
> > > > >>  > >>
> > > > >>  > >>  > Hi,
> > > > >>  > >>  >
> > > > >>  > >>  > yesterday I startet working on the JTA support for
> > > > > @Transactional.
> > > > >>  > >>  > My current approach is to implement a
> > > > > JtaPersistenceStrategy.
> > > > >>  > >>  > However that leads me to the problem: Who decides
> > > > >> which
> > > > >
> > > > >>  > >> PersistenceStrategy should be taken and how should this
> > > > > decision
> > > > >>  > >> be
> > > > >>  > made?
> > > > >>  > >>  > I have three suggestions:
> > > > >>  > >>  >
> > > > >>  > >>  > 1.      We detect, if a UserTransaction is available,
> > > > > if so, the
> > > > >>  > >>  JtaPersistenceStrategy is taken, otherwise the  > >>
> > > > >> ResourceLocalPersistenceStrategy is taken.
> > > > >>  > >>  >
> > > > >>  > >>  > 2.      We detect, if the involved persistence units
> > > > > use JTA or
> > > > >>  > >>  RESOURCE_LOCAL (which would lead to another question:
> > > > >> Would
> > > > > we
> > > > >>  > >> like to  support, that @Transactional mixes both
> > > > >> strategies?)
> > > > > and
> > > > >>  > >> decide from  that information  >
> > > > >>  > >>  > 3.      We let the user decide by making one (or both)
> > > > > persistence
> > > > >>  > >>  strategies @Alternatives  > >>  > What do you think?
> > > > >>  > >>  >
> > > > >>  > >>  > Cheers,
> > > > >>  > >>  > Arne
> > > > >>  > >>
> > > > >>  > >>
> > > > >>  > >
> > > > >>  >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jason Porter
> http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
> http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
>
> Software Engineer
> Open Source Advocate
> Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
>
> PGP key id: 926CCFF5
> PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
>

Reply via email to