Yes Werner, we know.
But nonetheless Hibernate managed to a.) get the spec on the ground pretty efficiently b.) implemented the JPA specification on top of their own logic in a timely fashion. As you know I'm contributing to a number of specifications as an _active_ JCP EG member myself for many years now, so I really know all this stuff! On the original topic: if I say '5 interfaces' than those don't need to be exactly the ones I proposed. I also don't care whether we call them ConfigSource or PropertySource (as example). All I like to do is to review and clean up the API. After all this is a community decision. If a majority of Tamaya committers say I'm nuts and the current API is fine, then be it. Otoh if the majority is to do the cleanup then we should do it properly. LieGrue, strub > On Monday, 18 July 2016, 20:55, Werner Keil <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hibernate vs. JPA is also an interesting read: > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9881611/whats-the-difference-between-jpa-and-hibernate > Like Tamaya, Apache Commons Config or other config solutions, Hibernate was > there before JPA. Its creators were involved as well as many others (even > Apache or Novell;-) > > Werner > > > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 7:56 PM, Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> before i vote, i would like to hear if there is a real blocker for a >> simpler api (besides collections). >> >> regards, >> gerhard >> >>
