responses inline...
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Kevin Sutter <kwsut...@gmail.com> wrote:
Good question, Matthew. This has been brought up a couple of different
times...
http://openjpa.208410.n2.nabble.com/JPA-2-1-td7215602.html
http://openjpa.208410.n2.nabble.com/DISCUSSION-JPA-2-1-spec-implementation-td7581978.html
So, there's been some interest, but not an overwhelming interest. Not to
the point of creating a team, figuring out the work effort, and divvying
up
the responsibilities. Contrast that with the JPA 2.0 development effort,
and there was overwhelming community support and participation. So, I
think there are a handful of us interested in a JPA 2.1 implementation,
but
more participation is required.
Pardon my surprise, but that sounds just plain bad. That kind of
sentiment threatens to scare users away, IMHO. I have always held OpenJPA
in high esteem as one of the major, credible implementations because it's
always been up to date WRT to the specs (and, let's not kid ourselves, it
hails from Kodo JDO). Frankly, the specs don't move very fast, and at
least previews of them are available well in advance of the actual GA
releases.
Pinaki has went so far to create a sandbox and start experimenting with
an
implementation. Again, he's a one-man show and can't do it all. Well,
he
probably could, but it would require a bit of work... :-)
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openjpa/sandboxes/21
Well, I would have expected a team of folks on this, not just one. After
all, Pinaki was arguing for expanded fetch plan capabilities in the JPA
expert group based on OpenJPA's current capabilities -- and rightfully so,
I might add.
Maybe we should resurrect that [DISCUSSION] topic
I think you should. Especially with any support customers you or the
OpenJPA project sponsors may have.
but I'm curious what
features of JPA 2.1 are of most interest to you? Or, is it just a matter
of being consistent with the latest specification?
One feature that's worth its development weight is fetch plans, which
OpenJPA, thanks to its current fetch plan implementation, can implement
fairly quickly. Further, OpenJPA's fetch plan support exceeds JPA's
requirement with fetch depth and recursion depth!
Additionally, I just happen to be writing an advanced JPA course right now,
and customers of this course want to use the JPA implementation in the
course that they have settled on in their organization. It just so happens
that the maiden voyage of this course covers JPA 2.1 and is for a customer
that is also an OpenJPA customer. And they're large. Now, I have to tell
them "Sorry, OpenJPA doesn't have plans to implement JPA 2.1". Can you
say, "Bye bye, customer"? EclipseLink & DataNucleus already implement 2.1,
and Hibernate's implementation is in progress. If not for the technical
reasons I gave above, then the need to remain competitive should be enough
to have you assemble a crack 2.1 team ASAP. Don't forget about BatooJPA
making noise (claiming top performance, although I take that with a few
grains of salt) and the NoSQL JPA implementations (DataNucleus, ObjectDB,
and Kundera), not to mention the Spring Data projects. Like it or not, you
are beset on all sides with competition.
Just my $0.02, which might just be worth around $0.029 with the interest
I've accumulated since working with JDO- & JPA-style lightweight
persistence since 1996 and with the expert groups since 2000.
Thanks,
Kevin
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Matthew Adams <matt...@matthewadams.me
wrote:
When will OpenJPA support JPA 2.1?
-matthew
--
mailto:matt...@matthewadams.me <matt...@matthewadams.me>
skype:matthewadams12
googletalk:matt...@matthewadams.me
http://matthewadams.me
http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewadams
--
mailto:matt...@matthewadams.me <matt...@matthewadams.me>
skype:matthewadams12
googletalk:matt...@matthewadams.me
http://matthewadams.me
http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewadams
