yup, that would be a good idea! LieGrue, strub
--- Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> schrieb am Mo, 2.2.2009: > Von: Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> > Betreff: Re: JPA and SPI thoughts > An: [email protected] > Datum: Montag, 2. Februar 2009, 15:51 > Hi ; > > Is it reasonable to add another maven module for SPI i.e > *webbeans-spi* and add all the SPI specific codes into it? > Therefore, we are able to collect all SPI specific codes > into one location and it is easy to manage. > > WDYT? > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Monday, February 2, 2009 4:07:56 PM > Subject: JPA and SPI thoughts > > Hi! > > First, the @PersitenceContext is _very_ preliminaryt. It > currently holds only 1 EntityManager for the app - but at > least we now can implement the most simiple JSF + JPA > implementations which is about 75% of all use cases. > > What I may do quickly is to add a Map with > key=unitname+name, obj=ThreadLocal for the EntityManager. > > > Another suggestion (mostly obvious, but I like to have such > things written down and agreed upon anyway): > > There are (will be) many parts which are different between > operating in a J2EE and SE environment. > So I'd like to reflect this fact in the package names, > e.g. > > > package org.apache.webbeans.jpa; > for all generic JPA things, SPI interfaces etc > > > package org.apache.webbeans.jpa.se; > for SE environments > > > package org.apache.webbeans.jpa.ee; > for the standard J2EE environment, we could also add > > package org.apache.webbeans.jpa.ee.openejb; > for OpenEJB (Geronimo) SPI implementation or > > package org.apache.webbeans.jpa.ee.jboss; > for JBoss SPI implementation. > > I think there are other areas too where we could use a > similar package naming schema. > > LieGrue, > strub
