Hi, Matthew asks a pertinent question: > When will OpenJPA support JPA 2.1?
Kevin's response is factual as well > 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... :-) I have done some analysis of the required changes to trunk to comply with JPA 2.1. And made some preliminary implementation work. But, as Kevin observes, Open Source is *not* a one-man show. It thrives on voluntary participation, where *anyone* can contribute if they are passionate about what they do. Not because they belong to a club of one sort or other. So for anyone reading this mail, you are welcome to express your wish to participate in OpenJPA community. You need not to be a member of any particular group or country, your only credential is you. You can write to me in confidence and I will organize the due process to welcome you in the fold. Someone in this thread had raised a doubt about current active participation being dominated by the employees of a single company. But I can assure you based on my association with many of them, that they are excellent engineers who had earned the karma by their own merit and open-minded enough to welcome you irrespective of who pays your bill or which country you live. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- About complying to a 2.1 JPA spec version, we should honor a pair of key principles that OpenJPA (or its predecessor Kodo) had always followed: a) it is not driven by a de jure specification and aspires to stay ahead of the curve via innovative features (that perhaps no customer is asking for at that point of times) b) its kernel is agnostic to datastore being of a particular kind (NoSQL enthusiasts should take note ;) While I will keep aside the later design principle for now, the former principle applies for the current topic. This forward-looking tendency can be observed when many "new" JPA features can be mapped onto "existing" OpenJPA features (FetchPlan being a notable example). So it does sound strange when we discuss about implementing JPA 2.1 features as if the decision is subjected to someone asking for it. A Open Source group builds features not because a spec committee or a customer, but because , the members, as engineers, think that a feature will be useful -- today or tomorrow. Time may prove otherwise, but unless we carry that spirit of innovation backed by our love for a technology domain, we, as a group, will fall into the trap of factory-built, proprietary software that is so twentieth century. Yes, a popular spec like JPA can provide a guideline, but our decision of how to take OpenJPA forward should not depend on it. ----- Pinaki Poddar Chair, Apache OpenJPA Project -- View this message in context: http://openjpa.208410.n2.nabble.com/OpenJPA-support-for-JPA-2-1-when-tp7584157p7584212.html Sent from the OpenJPA Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
