On 1/2/07, Rahul Thakur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Brett Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: [discuss] iBatis, JPA and Java 5.0
> I've been thinking stay with JDO for now,
- Original Message -
From: "Rahul Thakur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 4:05 PM
Subject: Re: [discuss] iBatis, JPA and Java 5.0
Having said all of that, my vote (which no one need care about, since
I haven't had much time to actually
Having said all of that, my vote (which no one need care about, since
I haven't had much time to actually contribute code here) is to
support hibernate with slight abstraction on top of it (modeled on
JPA's entity manager), so we get the benefits of transparent
persistence without requiring
On 2 Jan 07, at 10:59 PM 2 Jan 07, Brett Porter wrote:
I've been thinking stay with JDO for now, look at JPA in the long
term.
I think anyone who wanted to look at an iBatis store I say go for it.
JDO is not bad, but JPOX has proven to be less then robust. If we
were using Kodo it woul
- Original Message -
From: "Brett Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: [discuss] iBatis, JPA and Java 5.0
I've been thinking stay with JDO for now, look at JPA in the long
term.
I haven't used iBatis, and w
Sorry, I was writing my post when this came in. I'm in general
agreement, and while I do think moving to something more than JDO is
important, Brett is right, the use of hte store could use a good audit
and re-factor. Probably some of the problems of strange access
approaches used currently c
Yeah. But to have truly pluggable persistence, then we end up having to
pick LCD features. For isntance, if we want JDO, iBatis, and
JPA/Hibernate as possible approaches, then our design has to pretty much
ignore transparent relationship manifestation that JPA/hibernate/Toplink
provide. True
