Hi Dave, Sorry there was no post with the "official minutes" of the calihacky.
We mostly discussed build issues which Allen has already presented to the list.
Mitesh and Craig are working on implementations of the Datamapper pattern for both JDO and JPA to be used as back ends. The differences between the two implementations consist of 5 classes that implement the Datamapper interfaces; metadata files that contain the mapping of the classes to the database; and configuration information to invoke one implementation or the other.
One issue that we will need to discuss with the community is what we ship as the persistence back end.
o Allen expressed the opinion that once we have an implementation that works well, we should remove the other implementations. Having more than one is a distraction and means more work for the developers.
o Craig thinks that there is nothing wrong in keeping all the implementations that work, and community members can decide what the "out of the box" supported configurations are, but other community members might want to maintain a different persistence back end and not have to maintain a separate source tree to do so.
Regards, Craig On Sep 15, 2006, at 10:00 AM, Dave Johnson wrote:
I wish I could attend the hackathon, but cackalacky is too far from californy.Maybe somebody could sum up what progress was made? I'm not looking for a long post, but I do wonder: Are you guys pursuing the data mapper pattern? Are you shooting for JDO or JPA or both? - Dave
Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
