JPA 2.0 spec is out now, so there is some evolution in the JPA space.
And if we are to stay in this race we will definitely have to follow
the spec development.
As for Cayenne JPA provider (which was targeting JSR-220, aka JPA
1.0), we are deceptively close to the finish. "Close" cause all major
parts are there, all bridged to Cayenne main runtime core. From 10000
ft view we are covering all parts of the spec. "Deceptively" cause
there's a lot of small and midsize things needed here and there to
make it fully usable and pass the TCK. Getting there will still
require significant and dedicated effort.
Andrus
On Apr 6, 2009, at 12:18 PM, Andrey Razumovsky wrote:
Just curious, how much of JPA spec is currently supported? Can it
possibly
be all covered ever before it will become obsolete?
2009/4/6 Andrus Adamchik <[email protected]>
NDA is not such a big hurdle for a potential contributor. You just
sign it
and that's it. Somehow no such contributors materialized even when
JPA was a
new frontier (compared to now when there's a bunch of alternative
providers,
and we don't have a way to differentiate ourselves).
The reasons for splitting that code are related to reducing the
overhead we
will incur. Namely:
1. We need to get JPA out of the releases, including documentation.
(If we
don't ship the libs, keeping the docs does not make sense).
2. Updating JPA classes as Cayenne core API evolves and ensuring
all the
tests still pass requires extra effort. This is not a huge deal
now, but I
expect it to become a drag in 3.1+, as we start diverging from JPA
in things
like callbacks, etc.
But I agree that doing the proposed reorg is a strategical decision
in a
sense that we are sending a clear signal to the community: there
will be no
Cayenne JPA. At least this is honest. I am doing that reluctantly,
considering how many man-months I spent on that. The consolation is
that we
filled the blanks in Cayenne core as a result, while staying true
to Cayenne
user-friendly origins. This is something to build upon.
Andrus
On Apr 6, 2009, at 11:48 AM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
On 06/04/2009, at 5:55 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
Since we are not shipping JPA with 3.0, and further future of this
line
of development is undefined, we need to make some decisions now.
I suggest
doing what we did for DataViews - a separate location in SVN, and
a separate
wiki space. If this effort is revived (of which I have very
strong doubts),
we'll get it back to the main subtree.
What is the downside of just leaving it as is? The framework is
nicely
separated as a separate maven/eclipse project, and moving the
documentation
to be a second class citizen will only discourage anyone else from
working
on it.
As it is, there is perhaps more chance of someone finding it
interesting
and working on it, although the hurdles of signing the NDA, etc
make that
less likely.
Ari
-------------------------->
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
