Agree that the JPA_CONTAINER example is very bad. Usually the configuration for JPA is not done on the JPA container level but for each persistence unit.
LieGrue, strub > On Thursday, 8 January 2015, 18:11, Werner Keil <[email protected]> wrote: > > Especially with the JPA example, I would not even be sure if a > "JPA_CONTAINER" is a proper "common container", at most > something more > general. > Should there be something like it now, I guess we might better reconsider > some of them. > > Could be a different thread. > > > > > On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Guess it was only for common containers - and was not the purpose of >> my mail BTW. >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau >> http://www.tomitribe.com >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com >> https://github.com/rmannibucau >> >> >> 2015-01-08 17:58 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <[email protected]>: >> > Do we really want to define constants like >> > ContainerFactory.JPA_CONTAINER >> > ContainerFactory.BVAL_CONTAINER,...?? >> > >> > Regardless if that was a string, numeric value or enum, it'll be > as >> > restrictive as that ProjectStage in JSF or worse. >> > Just to name a few for some Spring container you may have a >> > SPRING_THIS_CONTAINER or SPRING_THAT_CONTAINER, BPM solutions had a >> > BPM_CONTAINER, the possibilities are endless. I wouldn't even > start >> unless >> > it was something as trivial as "Web Container" vs. > "Enterprise Container" >> > which we also find in WAR vs. EAR. Everything else is totally context- > or >> > application specific. >> > >> > Werner >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Tresch, Anatole < >> > [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> @Anatole I don't question everything, but as the discussions > are still >> >> ongoing I wanted to have a clean sheet discussion about it. >> >> -> Easy! I just tried to summarize the main point IMO, no bad > feelings. >> I >> >> think we have found a good discussion culture now, and I am happy > when >> we >> >> can keep that ;) >> >> >> >
