Re: [VOTE] Move JPA API dependency from dev.java.net to geronimo version
+1 On 2/10/07, Eddie O'Neil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +1 On 2/9/07, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +1 My vote is as much related to dissatisfaction with the maven repo that is used by glassfish as with the time it takes to get anything done through official channels. Craig On Feb 8, 2007, at 9:41 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote: It turns out that the JPA API we've been building against (the one from https://maven-repository.dev.java.net/repository/ javax.persistence/jars/persistence-api-1.0.jar) is not actually the final version of the spec: there are some minor (and binary- compatible) changes (some annotations don't have runtime retention, for example), but they are enough to prevent us from passing all the compatibility tests we need. The Geronimo API jar (http://mirrors.ibiblio.org/pub/mirrors/maven2/ org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec/geronimo- jpa_3.0_spec-1.0.jar) is compliant, as far as I can tell. How do people feel about changing the dependency from persistence- api-1.0.jar to geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec-1.0.jar? I've run through all our tests, and they pass with the Geronimo version. This would have the added advantage of unifying our spec jars to all be using the Geronimo versions. +1 indicates that you approve of the change -1 indicated that you disagree that the change should be made 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! -- -Michael Dick
Re: [VOTE] Move JPA API dependency from dev.java.net to geronimo version
+1 ...because of the compliance reasons you outlined. Michael Dick wrote: +1 On 2/10/07, Eddie O'Neil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +1 On 2/9/07, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +1 My vote is as much related to dissatisfaction with the maven repo that is used by glassfish as with the time it takes to get anything done through official channels. Craig On Feb 8, 2007, at 9:41 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote: It turns out that the JPA API we've been building against (the one from https://maven-repository.dev.java.net/repository/ javax.persistence/jars/persistence-api-1.0.jar) is not actually the final version of the spec: there are some minor (and binary- compatible) changes (some annotations don't have runtime retention, for example), but they are enough to prevent us from passing all the compatibility tests we need. The Geronimo API jar (http://mirrors.ibiblio.org/pub/mirrors/maven2/ org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec/geronimo- jpa_3.0_spec-1.0.jar) is compliant, as far as I can tell. How do people feel about changing the dependency from persistence- api-1.0.jar to geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec-1.0.jar? I've run through all our tests, and they pass with the Geronimo version. This would have the added advantage of unifying our spec jars to all be using the Geronimo versions. +1 indicates that you approve of the change -1 indicated that you disagree that the change should be made 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: [VOTE] Move JPA API dependency from dev.java.net to geronimo version
+1 On Feb 9, 2007, at 12:41 AM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote: It turns out that the JPA API we've been building against (the one from https://maven-repository.dev.java.net/repository/ javax.persistence/jars/persistence-api-1.0.jar) is not actually the final version of the spec: there are some minor (and binary- compatible) changes (some annotations don't have runtime retention, for example), but they are enough to prevent us from passing all the compatibility tests we need. The Geronimo API jar (http://mirrors.ibiblio.org/pub/mirrors/maven2/ org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec/geronimo- jpa_3.0_spec-1.0.jar) is compliant, as far as I can tell. How do people feel about changing the dependency from persistence- api-1.0.jar to geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec-1.0.jar? I've run through all our tests, and they pass with the Geronimo version. This would have the added advantage of unifying our spec jars to all be using the Geronimo versions. +1 indicates that you approve of the change -1 indicated that you disagree that the change should be made
Re: [VOTE] Move JPA API dependency from dev.java.net to geronimo version
+1 Either move to the Geronimo version or get the dev.java version updated. Either way, just so that we're using a spec-compliant version of the API. Thanks! Kevin On 2/8/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It turns out that the JPA API we've been building against (the one from https://maven-repository.dev.java.net/repository/ javax.persistence/jars/persistence-api-1.0.jar) is not actually the final version of the spec: there are some minor (and binary- compatible) changes (some annotations don't have runtime retention, for example), but they are enough to prevent us from passing all the compatibility tests we need. The Geronimo API jar (http://mirrors.ibiblio.org/pub/mirrors/maven2/ org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec/geronimo- jpa_3.0_spec-1.0.jar) is compliant, as far as I can tell. How do people feel about changing the dependency from persistence- api-1.0.jar to geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec-1.0.jar? I've run through all our tests, and they pass with the Geronimo version. This would have the added advantage of unifying our spec jars to all be using the Geronimo versions. +1 indicates that you approve of the change -1 indicated that you disagree that the change should be made
Re: [VOTE] Move JPA API dependency from dev.java.net to geronimo version
+1 The Geronimo API is verified using the official Jee5 signatures file. -dain On Feb 8, 2007, at 9:41 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote: It turns out that the JPA API we've been building against (the one from https://maven-repository.dev.java.net/repository/ javax.persistence/jars/persistence-api-1.0.jar) is not actually the final version of the spec: there are some minor (and binary- compatible) changes (some annotations don't have runtime retention, for example), but they are enough to prevent us from passing all the compatibility tests we need. The Geronimo API jar (http://mirrors.ibiblio.org/pub/mirrors/maven2/ org/apache/geronimo/specs/geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec/geronimo- jpa_3.0_spec-1.0.jar) is compliant, as far as I can tell. How do people feel about changing the dependency from persistence- api-1.0.jar to geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec-1.0.jar? I've run through all our tests, and they pass with the Geronimo version. This would have the added advantage of unifying our spec jars to all be using the Geronimo versions. +1 indicates that you approve of the change -1 indicated that you disagree that the change should be made
