Re: Source license headers in OpenJPA
Hi Marc, Thanks for the heads-up. I'll follow up with the responsible team and see if it can be improved. Craig On Apr 15, 2007, at 12:48 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote: I notice you found some files with no license headers at all. I had actually known those files existed, but I didn't know if the format supported comments. They were services files, and I investigated and found that our services parser actually does support comments. However, the parser in javax.persistence.Persistence (that parses the META-INF/ javax.persistence.spi.PersistenceProvider file) surprisingly doesn't support comments, so I had to leave the license out of that file. On Apr 14, 2007, at 11:21 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: Good exercise anyway. I notice you found some files with no license headers at all. Good job. Craig On Apr 14, 2007, at 2:57 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote: And that's why vi is the best editor in the world :) On Apr 14, 2007, at 2:53 PM, Eddie O'Neil wrote: Nice work -- 26 minutes by my count. :) Eddie On 4/14/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I just went ahead and manually updated the license headers, just to get this taken care of quickly. On Apr 14, 2007, at 2:30 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: > Hi Eddie, > > Removing Cliff from this discussion; sorry for the spam, Cliff, but > I recall you asking for it... ;-) > > On Apr 14, 2007, at 2:21 PM, Eddie O'Neil wrote: > >> Craig-- >> >> You're quite right; my apologies for not having caught this >> before now. >> >> Given that this policy went into effect in November 2006, IMHO the >> 0.9.7 release that we're currently reviewing and voting on needs >> to be >> updated to include the appropriate headers. >> >> Thoughts? > > The Release Manager needs to rescind the vote for 0.9.7 and read > the document below in detail. It contains references to scripts > that will update the license headers easier than manually editing > all the files. > > Craig >> >> Eddie >> >> >> >> On 4/14/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> The license headers we are using are in conflict with current >>> practice, as documented here: >>> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html >>> >>> There was a big discussion about this topic, but the above is >>> normative as of today. See the discussion in this message: >>> >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/ >>> 200612.mbox/% >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> Bottom line, there should not be a copyright notice in the source >>> headers, only a license notice. >>> >>> 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! >>> >>> >>> > > 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! > 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! 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
Re: Source license headers in OpenJPA
I notice you found some files with no license headers at all. I had actually known those files existed, but I didn't know if the format supported comments. They were services files, and I investigated and found that our services parser actually does support comments. However, the parser in javax.persistence.Persistence (that parses the META-INF/javax.persistence.spi.PersistenceProvider file) surprisingly doesn't support comments, so I had to leave the license out of that file. On Apr 14, 2007, at 11:21 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: Good exercise anyway. I notice you found some files with no license headers at all. Good job. Craig On Apr 14, 2007, at 2:57 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote: And that's why vi is the best editor in the world :) On Apr 14, 2007, at 2:53 PM, Eddie O'Neil wrote: Nice work -- 26 minutes by my count. :) Eddie On 4/14/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I just went ahead and manually updated the license headers, just to get this taken care of quickly. On Apr 14, 2007, at 2:30 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: > Hi Eddie, > > Removing Cliff from this discussion; sorry for the spam, Cliff, but > I recall you asking for it... ;-) > > On Apr 14, 2007, at 2:21 PM, Eddie O'Neil wrote: > >> Craig-- >> >> You're quite right; my apologies for not having caught this >> before now. >> >> Given that this policy went into effect in November 2006, IMHO the >> 0.9.7 release that we're currently reviewing and voting on needs >> to be >> updated to include the appropriate headers. >> >> Thoughts? > > The Release Manager needs to rescind the vote for 0.9.7 and read > the document below in detail. It contains references to scripts > that will update the license headers easier than manually editing > all the files. > > Craig >> >> Eddie >> >> >> >> On 4/14/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> The license headers we are using are in conflict with current >>> practice, as documented here: >>> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html >>> >>> There was a big discussion about this topic, but the above is >>> normative as of today. See the discussion in this message: >>> >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/ >>> 200612.mbox/% >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] %3e >>> >>> Bottom line, there should not be a copyright notice in the source >>> headers, only a license notice. >>> >>> 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! >>> >>> >>> > > 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! > 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!
Re: (No)existing table in SQL server
On 4/15/07, armad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I resolve my problem :) ... Thanks for your help Jacek :) You're welcome! I'm really glad you've sorted it out. I'm learning JPA and being able to help others ensures good understanding of the spec. Jacek -- Jacek Laskowski http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl
Re: (No)existing table in SQL server
Thanks, I resolve my problem :) I had a problem, because I didn't list my entities. When I wrote all entity classes to persistence.xml file, everything was ok. Apart from this the really important thing is, that OpenJPA create db schema not in deploy moment, but in first call to entity. Another approach is in Hibernate and TopLink. regards, Thanks for your help Jacek :) -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/%28No%29existing-table-in-SQL-server-tf3565587.html#a10002305 Sent from the open-jpa-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: (No)existing table in SQL server
I look at my application once again, and I saw that OpenJPA really doesn't create tables in my database ! In my persistence.xml file I have following entry : ... ... Do You know how can I configure OpenJPA to recreate tables ? Sure. It works with OpenJPA 0.9.7-SNAPSHOT and 0.9.8-SNAPSHOT: It won't work with 0.9.6-incubating. Jacek -- Jacek Laskowski http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl
Re: (No)existing table in SQL server
Hi Jacek, I look at my application once again, and I saw that OpenJPA really doesn't create tables in my database ! In my persistence.xml file I have following entry : ... ... When I deploy my appliction, then OpenJPA delete all tables from database and then It doesn't create it. Do You know how can I configure OpenJPA to recreate tables ? regards, armad -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/%28No%29existing-table-in-SQL-server-tf3565587.html#a10001573 Sent from the open-jpa-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
