oops, I see a slight problem: On the one hand it would be very valuable to only have the SPI (the _interfaces_ themself) in the webbeans-impl and maintain separate modules for SE and various J2EE container. Otoh how would the tests be performed? So we imho at least have to keep the SE service providers in the impl module.
so in the impl there could be a org.apache.webbeans.spi which contains only the interfaces plus a subpackage org.apache.webbeans.spi.se which contains the SE variant of the service providers and we could do an own module for e.g. webbeans-geronimo WDYT? Btw, can you please review my EntityManagersManager? I'm still confused about the part 'has same scope as the object it is in' though... I did not add the EntityManagersManager definition to the WebBeansFinder because this will only be used by the SE JPA service provider. LieGrue, strub --- Mark Struberg <[email protected]> schrieb am Mo, 2.2.2009: > Von: Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > Betreff: Re: JPA and SPI thoughts > An: [email protected] > Datum: Montag, 2. Februar 2009, 16:55 > 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
