To consider possible simplification and common denominators, it seems good to have a look at Tamaya's base interface: http://tamaya.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/tamaya/Configuration.html and https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-configuration/apidocs/org/apache/commons/configuration2/ImmutableConfiguration.html they have at least some very basic methods in common. Leaving the order of key or type aside.
In your proposed Config interface I only saw a String get(String) method, but for that sorry, we could just stick to the good old Properties and forget about the whole thing ;-| A default or convenience method (what Commons Config 2 calls getString()) why not, but without type-safe yet extensible getters, there is little value to create a new API with more or less the same value (literally) than java.util.Properties. I know you're on the CDI EG, other than that, not sure, which others (according to JCP.org, not mailing lists or other forms of contribution) Being on both sides (EG and EC) in many cases, I am used to question JSRs and their Spec Leads, so it's not bad if this happens before any of that was filed or sonsidered towards a JSR. Although there had been 2 attempt (one even by Adam Bien at a very early stage of his efforts in the JCP) JSR 377 is an example for a seemingly premature JSR proposal. And unless Andres does some "miracle" it may likely be shut down by the EC with the next Renewal Ballot. So JCP.next introduced a few measures to avoid "neverending JSRs" like 107 or 310 now, but sometimes it isn't a bad thing to wait or file it based on experience by one or several Open Source projects. Hibernate was one, but considering the JPA RI is based on TopLink (now EclipseLink) it certainly isn't the only project behind what became JPA either. Cheers, Werner On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > >> > >> >
