On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 1:07 AM, Igor Drobiazko
<[email protected]> wrote:
> @Kalle: looks like Tynamo JPA integration only support a single persistence
> unit per application? RIght? Am I missing something?

At the moment, yes.

Kalle


> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 2:24 AM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 07:05:00 -0200, Igor Drobiazko
>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> since our last 5.3/5.4 discussion I've been thinking about JPA
>> integration
>> >> and came to the conclusion that Tapestry must have a built-in support
>> for
>> >> JPA. Even though I personally still prefer Hibernate, I'm pretty sure
>> JPA
>> >> is the future and we need to support it out of the box.
>> > JPA 2 has most (if not all) the features Hibernate has that JPA 1 didn't.
>> I
>> > haven't used JPA yet, but I agree that it's the future.
>>
>> Currently, Tynamo offers modules both for JPA1 and JPA2. Igor would
>> need to work carefully to move the common logic to the orm module, but
>> certainly it'd be better for code reusability. What would make this
>> package orm specific? Not absolutely sure it needs to be, I know that
>> Alex Kotchnev is at least thinking about making a tapestry-jdo module.
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> Igor Drobiazko
> http://tapestry5.de
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to