cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Antonio Gallardo" <agalla...@agsoftware.dnsalias.com>
Subject Re: OJB and Cocoon
Date Fri, 21 Nov 2003 07:15:59 GMT
Hi:

Sorry, but I am reviewing old mails. ;-D

This mail was wrote recently and cleary present the position of Hibernate
Team about to not change the LGPL license. See this post in a OJB list:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.ojb.user/10414/match=lgpl

Best Regards,

Antonio Gallardo.

PS: The below mail was in time when Stefano was having good times in
Guayaquil. ;-D

Best Regards,

Antonio Gallardo.

Stefano Mazzocchi dijo:
>
> On Monday, Jul 21, 2003, at 04:26 America/Guayaquil, Ugo Cei wrote:
>
>> Antonio Gallardo wrote:
>>> Hi:
>>> I already do contact with the Apache OJB community. My idea is to use
>>> OJB
>>> instead of Hibernate.
>>> Here is the last mail from the communication with the project leader
>>> of
>>> OJB community.
>>> Comments are welcome. :)
>>
>> Being one of the foremost proponents of Hibernate, I'd like to add my
>> 0.02 €.
>>
>> I chose to go with Hibernate for our in-house projects some time ago
>> and I'm very happy with it, licensing issues notwithstanding (we
>> aren't distributing any of our code, so we haven't any problem with
>> the (L)GPL, at the moment). In performing our evaluation, one of the
>> most important factors was the perception that there was an active
>> community around Hibernate. This did not appear to be the case with
>> OJB, at least from the website. I'm happy to hear that OJB is
>> progressing along nicely instead. Competition can be a good thing
>> (even though maybe "coopetition" would be better).
>>
>> As far as Cocoon is concerned, there is really no reason why we should
>> "choose" a persistence framework over another one. Properly layered
>> web applications should not mix concerns too much between layers. This
>> is why I refrain from accessing any persistence-related code from the
>> view layer. I'm not going so far as to create an encapsulation of the
>> persistence mechanism that would allow me to change it without
>> changing the client code, since I think it would be overkill (KISS!),
>> but referring to Hibernate/OJB/whatever APIs from the flow only,
>> directly or indireclty, is OK in my book.
>>
>> In other words, I personally see no benefit in developing a generic
>> framework for tieing views to persistence as a Cocoon block or other
>> kind of component. Let the application developers choose their
>> persistence mechanism (straight JDBC, O/R mapping, EJB, ...) according
>> to the specific application needs and give them the tools (flow) to
>> control the interaction between the Model and the View.
>
> I agree with Ugo that we should not choose *one* persistence framework.
> But I, personally, would love to see a complex webapp that uses a
> object-relational persistence layer shipped with cocoon and we can't do
> that with hibernate.
>
> So I welcome any effort that will allow us to show to our users how to
> use object-relational persistence out of the box.
>
> Ah, btw, given the recent (slashdotted) clarification that the FSF
> believes that the LGPL for java is as viral as the GPL, the hibernate
> people might have a *real* reason, now, to get to a more
> cooperation-friendly license.
>
> --
> Stefano.


Mime
View raw message