db-jdo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Bouschen <mbo.t...@spree.de>
Subject Re: 2nd version of inheritance patch 1 of 2
Date Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:22:00 GMT

I agree it makes sense to check in the inheritance patch, so I checked 
it in :-).

Now maven runtck.jdori runs 22 configurations and 14 of them fail.

Regards Michael

> Hi Craig, Michelle,
> I agree with Andy that it makes sense to check in the inheritance patch. 
> If there are still issues concerning the patch then we can handle them 
> as bugs.
> For this reason, I provided an updated version of the patch which uses 
> qualified class names for mapping 2. I broke up the patch into two 
> files. You find the first file attached. I'll send the second version in 
> a separate mail.
> Note, that this patch uses the same mapping ids as Michelle's patch 
> implementing schema orm attribute. let me know, if you prefer to change 
> the mapping ids of the inheritance patch.
> Regards,
> Michael
>> Hi Michael,
>>> I'm using the latest JPOX build and still get exceptions for mapping 2
>>> for both identity types:
>>> Application identity: org.jpox.metadata.InvalidMetaDataException: Class
>>> "org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.company.Employee" has been specified to use
>>> "subclass-table" inheritance strategy yet has at least one field that is
>>> a Collection/Map. This is not currently supported by JPOX.
>> Hardly suprising since I previously said that this is not currently 
>> supported, in the original mail. I've made some changes to enable 
>> this, but haven't yet removed the metadata check (because I don't want 
>> all users going off and using it yet).
>> My email of this morning, and Eriks' of last night, were for the issue 
>> about overriding field specifications of superclasses.
>>> Please apply the inheritance patch and copy the attached ORM files to
>>> "tck20/test/orm/<identity type>/org/apache/jdo/tck/pc/company". 
>> Since these are new tests, what is the problem with just checking them 
>> into SVN ? so then we can just run the TCK when we next get a moment. 
>> Since we're not talking about released software here, I don't see a 
>> problem with it.
>> I personally don't want to get into applying patches to the TCK in 
>> order to try it - since there's only me and Erik working on JPOX 
>> core/enhancer in our spare time, we have enough to be working on right 
>> now ;-)
Michael Bouschen		Tech@Spree Engineering GmbH
mailto:mbo.tech@spree.de	http://www.tech.spree.de/
Tel.:++49/30/235 520-33		Buelowstr. 66			
Fax.:++49/30/2175 2012		D-10783 Berlin			

View raw message