db-jdo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Uploading a bundle to ibiblio
Date Fri, 05 Aug 2005 21:56:36 GMT
Hi Trygve,

On Aug 5, 2005, at 2:08 PM, Trygve Laugstøl wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 01:54:15PM -0700, Craig Russell wrote:
>
>>    Hi Trygve,
>>    On Aug 5, 2005, at 11:50 AM, Trygve Laugstøl wrote:
>>
>>      On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 11:37:25AM -0700, Craig Russell wrote:
>>
>>
>>    This is true because of intrinsic differences between the two  
>> jars. An
>>    application built against JDO 1 will need the JDO 1 jar files,  
>> and won't
>>    work with JDO 2. We have implemented source compatibility but  
>> binary
>>    compatibility turned out to be not practical. So once you  
>> choose JDO 2,
>>    you need to depend on the JDO 2 jar and the JDO 1 jar is  
>> worthless.
>>
>
> Ok, sorry, I was assuming that they where going to be binary  
> compatible.
>
> I'm just wondering why was it hard to be binary compatible? As far  
> as I
> can tall all changes are binary compatible, but of course I don't  
> have the
> full overview.

Actually, most of the changes in JDO 2 are binary compatible, but we  
made a decision on one that would not work.

The JDOHelper method getPersistenceManagerFactory(Properties props)  
was changed to getPersistenceManagerFactory(Map props). It seemed  
pointless to keep the old method call, deprecate it, and cause all  
applications calling the method with a Properties instance to get a  
compiler warning.
>
>
>>
>>      because if A depends on "jdo1" and B depend on
>>      "jdo2" I will end up with both of them in my class path. If  
>> they both
>>      had
>>      the artifact id "jdo" Maven's versioning mediation will take  
>> care of
>>      selecting one or the other based on the current strategy (the  
>> strategy
>>      by
>>      default is to pick the version specified 'neareast' the  
>> currently
>>      building
>>      project).
>>
>>    I'm not sure whether this is an issue based on the discussion  
>> above. Any
>>    project will be using either JDO 1 or JDO 2 and there's no  
>> decision for
>>    maven to make. And all projects that share a class path have to  
>> choose the
>>    same one.
>>
>
> Yes it was. Thanks for your clarifications and for getting the JDO
> snapshots to the repository will for sure make my life better.

Thanks for your comments. We really are trying hard to make life  
easier for others.

Craig
>
> --
> Trygve
>

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!


Mime
View raw message