[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-1175?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17208008#comment-17208008
]
Petri Tuomola commented on FINERACT-1175:
-----------------------------------------
Agree with the above - it would seem to be a lot simpler to just use the base
package. I'm not sure what the initial intent of this was. But if no one knows
why we need to make things complex, let's make them simple...
> Fix spm.repository / spm.domain JPA bug (?), and simplify appContext.xml
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FINERACT-1175
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-1175
> Project: Apache Fineract
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Michael Vorburger
> Assignee: Michael Vorburger
> Priority: Major
>
> While I was working on FINERACT-1127, I've noticed that appContext.xml
> individually lists 10+ packages.. why not just use org.apache.fineract.** ?
> There is also a
> fineract-provider/src/main/resources/META-INF/spring/spmContext.xml, which
> seems weird.. why is that, and only that, in a separate file, instead of
> listed in appContext.xml? Would seem more consistent to have all in one.
> Most importantly, perhaps, the {{<jpa:repositories
> base-package="org.apache.fineract.spm.repository"/>}} in spmContext.xml seems
> inconsistent with appContext.xml.. shouldn't that be
> {{org.apache.fineract.spm.domain}}, instead? Or are the other ones wrong?
> (And this is another reason why having them all together in a single place
> seems easier, to see differences.)
> [~ptuomola] [~aleks] do you perhaps have any thoughts about this?
> [~xurror] ([~kaze] ?) I'm not sure if this is something that particularly
> interests you, in the context of the OpenJPA to EclipseLink migration, but I
> thought I would just mention it here FYI, and on the off chance that this is
> causing you any issues during that project.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
