it would be great if SE and EE could be separated, so we can have a more light weight module that can be used in SE projects then we may use web-beans to build a lightweight RCP platform too. and it helps to make a complete stack on top of it.
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > > > >
