> Seems to me that something is wrong here. Maybe the code in > PersistenceProviderImpl should be removing the property? > Maybe the ConfigurationProvider should know about the > property? Maybe this is actually not something that should > be settable in persistence.xml?
#2. Thanks for pointing this out. -Patrick -- Patrick Linskey BEA Systems, Inc. _______________________________________________________________________ Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it. > -----Original Message----- > From: David Jencks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 10:21 AM > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: ClassTransformerOptions in persistence.xml properties? > > After a lot of research I found that its possible to get > something like this into the persistence unit info properties > > openjpa.ClassTransformerOptions=ScanDevPath=true > > (expresses as part of a properties file rather than the > equivalent xml from persistence.xml) > > and that results in devScan == true in a bunch of method > calls in class transforming. There's some code in > PersistenceProviderImpl that explicitly looks for this: > > String ctOpts = (String) Configurations.getProperty > (CLASS_TRANSFORMER_OPTIONS, > pui.getProperties()); (lines 94-95) > > leading me to believe that this might be a reasonable thing > to try to do. > > However, I get a lot of messages: > > 08:43:22,636 WARN [Runtime] The property named > "openjpa.ClassTransformerOptions" was not recognized and will > be ignored, although the name closely matches a valid > property called "openjpa.ClassResolver". > > Seems to me that something is wrong here. Maybe the code in > PersistenceProviderImpl should be removing the property? > Maybe the ConfigurationProvider should know about the > property? Maybe this is actually not something that should > be settable in persistence.xml? > > thanks > david jencks > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
