[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZEST-103?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Niclas Hedhman updated ZEST-103:
--------------------------------
Description:
Over the years we have several times tried to figure out how to incorporate ORM
technology to Zest, and kept failing. Hibernate was tried in 2007, and iBatis
was attempted in 2008, and although the latter showed some reasonable promise,
it didn't manage to reach all the way.
We have since done a lot to let extensions into the runtime model, and we have
more features around Associations in Property and NamedAssociations which I
don't think existed in those days.
I think it is time to re-open this effort, as it is the constant push-back
whenever I introduce Zest to new people. It is an easy "ok, you don't have
that, therefor I have no interest in listening to you." and any other argument
is ignored.
I think it is more important to be able to use existing tables, than to support
arbitrary Zest Entity structures to always have a reasonable SQL structure.
I.e. SQL schema rules the Entities. Then from there we could investigate
further what full Mixin support would entail.
Before starting the implementation, I think we should gather usecase and lay
out in documentation how various common schemas can be handled into Zest
entities and values.
NOTE: This is ONLY about EntityStore and not about generic query.
was:
Over the years we have several times tried to figure out how to incorporate ORM
technology to Zest, and kept failing. Hibernate was tried in 2007, and iBatis
was attempted in 2008, and although the latter showed some reasonable promise,
it didn't manage to reach all the way.
We have since done a lot to let extensions into the runtime model, and we have
more features around Associations in Property and NamedAssociations which I
don't think existed in those days.
I think it is time to re-open this effort, as it is the constant push-back
whenever I introduce Zest to new people. It is an easy "ok, you don't have
that, therefor I have no interest in listening to you." and any other argument
is ignored.
I think it is more important to be able to use existing tables, than to support
arbitrary Zest Entity structures to always have a reasonable SQL structure.
I.e. SQL schema rules the Entities. Then from there we could investigate
further what full Mixin support would entail.
Before starting the implementation, I think we should gather usecase and lay
out in documentation how various common schemas can be handled into Zest
entities and values.
> ORM system
> ----------
>
> Key: ZEST-103
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZEST-103
> Project: Zest
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Niclas Hedhman
> Fix For: 3.0
>
>
> Over the years we have several times tried to figure out how to incorporate
> ORM technology to Zest, and kept failing. Hibernate was tried in 2007, and
> iBatis was attempted in 2008, and although the latter showed some reasonable
> promise, it didn't manage to reach all the way.
> We have since done a lot to let extensions into the runtime model, and we
> have more features around Associations in Property and NamedAssociations
> which I don't think existed in those days.
> I think it is time to re-open this effort, as it is the constant push-back
> whenever I introduce Zest to new people. It is an easy "ok, you don't have
> that, therefor I have no interest in listening to you." and any other
> argument is ignored.
> I think it is more important to be able to use existing tables, than to
> support arbitrary Zest Entity structures to always have a reasonable SQL
> structure. I.e. SQL schema rules the Entities. Then from there we could
> investigate further what full Mixin support would entail.
> Before starting the implementation, I think we should gather usecase and lay
> out in documentation how various common schemas can be handled into Zest
> entities and values.
> NOTE: This is ONLY about EntityStore and not about generic query.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
