Re: [jug-discussion] list policy

2002-11-13 Thread Warner Onstine
Of course if we do get the JUG setup as a non-prof with members we might be able to pay for meeting space and most likely we could get snacks ;-). Just a thought. -warner On Wednesday, November 13, 2002, at 09:49 PM, Tim Colson wrote: plus I'm still waiting to hear about my "Membership" prop

Re: [jug-discussion] list policy

2002-11-13 Thread Simon Ritchie
Heat is difficult. It would take a lot to get our systems manager to raise the temperature of that room. And he would demand payment in Guinness. :) Simon. Tim Colson wrote: plus I'm still waiting to hear about my "Membership" proposal ;-). If membership fees enable more heat and snacks

RE: [jug-discussion] list policy

2002-11-13 Thread Tim Colson
>plus I'm still waiting to hear about my "Membership" proposal ;-). If membership fees enable more heat and snacks at the meetings, then I'm all for em'. Tim - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands

[jug-discussion] list policy

2002-11-13 Thread Warner Onstine
Hi all, It recently came to my attention that not everyone knows how this list works, I apologize for not making this clear. We also don't have any kind of welcome message, unfortunately I cannot change that right now (I'll have to talk with the sysadmin). So, I will clarify this now, to clear

Re[2]: [jug-discussion] [dec presentation] survey of O/R tools

2002-11-13 Thread Andrew Barton
Wednesday, November 13, 2002, 6:14:23 PM, you wrote: >> 3) I don't have an intimate knowledge of EJB LN> Would anyone like to volunteer instead? Rick Hightower? I'd be happy to represent EJB in a comparison of different O/R tools. We're using it very successfully and are very productive with i

Re: [jug-discussion] [dec presentation] survey of O/R tools

2002-11-13 Thread Warner Onstine
On Wednesday, November 13, 2002, at 08:29 PM, Lesiecki Nicholas wrote: See more below: --- Warner Onstine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Wednesday, November 13, 2002, at 06:14 PM, Lesiecki Nicholas wrote: Warner says: I'd prefer not to [cover EJB/CMP] for a few reasons: 1) While I know tha

RE: [jug-discussion] [dec presentation] survey of O/R tools

2002-11-13 Thread Lesiecki Nicholas
> Nick ( or anyone else ) have you worked with EJB 2.x stuff? Yep, it's all we use at eBlox. We use Resin as our EJB and servlet container and it has served us very well. The crucial savings comes through the use of CMR and EJB-QL. We use local entity beans so performance hasn't been an issue for

Re: [jug-discussion] [dec presentation] survey of O/R tools

2002-11-13 Thread Lesiecki Nicholas
See more below: --- Warner Onstine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wednesday, November 13, 2002, at 06:14 PM, Lesiecki Nicholas wrote: > > > > >> Warner says: > >> I'd prefer not to [cover EJB/CMP] for a few reasons: > >> 1) While I know that it is a kind of O/R it is not the kind I am > >> in

Re: [jug-discussion] Sun will trademark anything

2002-11-13 Thread Rob Gingell
Warner Onstine wrote: > A, someone from Sun on the list (hides head in shame ;-). Apologies for the sneak attack -- no way anyone could know I lurk here. And, we all find Dilbert funny for a reason -- companies and organizations do sometimes do things that at least look silly even if in fact

RE: [jug-discussion] [dec presentation] survey of O/R tools

2002-11-13 Thread Tim Colson
> Well, [Warner] personally have some issues with EJB ;-). If I saw a good > presentation on it maybe I'd change my mind. I agree with you, especially with the 1.1 spec, but I did see a compelling preso on 2.x last year at JavaOne...Tyler Jewell from BEA gave a talk on EJB 2.x and fired me up t

Re: [jug-discussion] Sun will trademark anything

2002-11-13 Thread Warner Onstine
A, someone from Sun on the list (hides head in shame ;-). On Wednesday, November 13, 2002, at 06:16 PM, Rob Gingell wrote: For those of you who don't know SM - stands for Service Mark. Now why in the world would Sun put a service mark on this? Because it embeds a trademark. Yeah, I reali

Re: [jug-discussion] [dec presentation] survey of O/R tools

2002-11-13 Thread Warner Onstine
On Wednesday, November 13, 2002, at 06:14 PM, Lesiecki Nicholas wrote: Warner says: I'd prefer not to [cover EJB/CMP] for a few reasons: 1) While I know that it is a kind of O/R it is not the kind I am interested in at the moment What kind are you interested in? Well, I personally have som

Re: [jug-discussion] Sun will trademark anything

2002-11-13 Thread Rob Gingell
>For those of you who don't know SM - stands for Service Mark. Now why >in the world would Sun put a service mark on this? Because it embeds a trademark. Thank the lawyers -- both the ones that are overly protective but of course also the ones who defend clients who abuse trademarks when you do

Re: [jug-discussion] [dec presentation] survey of O/R tools

2002-11-13 Thread Lesiecki Nicholas
> Warner says: > I'd prefer not to [cover EJB/CMP] for a few reasons: > 1) While I know that it is a kind of O/R it is not the kind I am > interested in at the moment What kind are you interested in? > 2) It isn't standalone - it requires an EJB container Point taken, but every framework requi

[jug-discussion] Sun will trademark anything

2002-11-13 Thread Warner Onstine
I just got the latest Java Developer Connection in my mail box and noticed this: Read about the next evolution of the Java Community ProcessSM (JCPSM), version 2.5. (October 31, 2002) For those of you who don't know SM - stands for Service Mark. Now why in the world would Sun put a service mark

Re: [jug-discussion] [dec presentation] survey of O/R tools

2002-11-13 Thread Warner Onstine
On Wednesday, November 13, 2002, at 03:52 PM, Lesiecki Nicholas wrote: +1. But I'd add EJB/CMP if you're familiar enough with it to compare it to the others. I'd prefer not to for a few reasons: 1) While I know that it is a kind of O/R it is not the kind I am interested in at the moment 2) I

Re: [jug-discussion] [dec presentation] survey of O/R tools

2002-11-13 Thread Warner Onstine
On Wednesday, November 13, 2002, at 03:47 PM, Tim Colson wrote: I would like to offer a presentation for December's topic covering Object-Relational mapping tools. An emphatic +1 :-) Some of the tools I would be reviewing will be: Castor (castor.exolab.org) Hibernate (http://hibernate.source

RE: [jug-discussion] [dec presentation] survey of O/R tools

2002-11-13 Thread Lesiecki Nicholas
+1. But I'd add EJB/CMP if you're familiar enough with it to compare it to the others. cheers, nick --- Tim Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I would like to offer a presentation for December's topic covering > > Object-Relational mapping tools. > > An emphatic +1 :-) > > > Some of the too

RE: [jug-discussion] [dec presentation] survey of O/R tools

2002-11-13 Thread Tim Colson
> I would like to offer a presentation for December's topic covering > Object-Relational mapping tools. An emphatic +1 :-) > Some of the tools I would be reviewing will be: > Castor (castor.exolab.org) > Hibernate (http://hibernate.sourceforge.net/) > Torque (jakarta.apache.org/turbine/torque) >

Re: [jug-discussion] [dec presentation] survey of O/R tools

2002-11-13 Thread Richard Hightower
Warner, I have an example schema that I would like you to use. It is small and easy, and I have the DDL scripts for it already. Info on the schema can be found here (nice picture too) http://www.rickhightower.com/ejbcmpcmrtut.html Source code for the SQL DDL can be found here... http://www.rick

[jug-discussion] [dec presentation] survey of O/R tools

2002-11-13 Thread Warner Onstine
Hi all, I would like to offer a presentation for December's topic covering Object-Relational mapping tools. Some of the tools I would be reviewing will be: Castor (castor.exolab.org) Hibernate (http://hibernate.sourceforge.net/) Torque (jakarta.apache.org/turbine/torque) OJB (jakarta.apache.org/o