> Just a matter of bandwidth. Also, I prefer not to create modules for
> things I'm not actively using. I currently use Hibernate in both my
> client projects, but don't use JPA. I or someone else could throw
> something together, or take a contribution, but I'd prefer to have
> someone who actively maintains and improves whatever library is
> created.
Point taken. I am happy with tapestry-jpa as a seperate module.
It's just that people often say to me: "What? No JPA support?"
Sometimes its hard to explain that there exists a third party module
that is not part of tapestry itself. But I guess we can solve this
with the new homepage and make it more clear that it is totally OK to
use external modules.
Anyway, what I would really love to see is that tapestry's core makes
it easier for others to integrate new persistence strategies.
@CommitAfter and other stuff could be factored out of the hibernate
module - its used in every persistence module I've created so far.
This would be a good start, and could be extended as needed.
To make it short: please don't put new logic into tapestry-hibernate
that could be useful for other persistence strategies as well.
Piero
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
