db-jdo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From karan malhi <karan.ma...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Associations with attributes/roles
Date Sun, 26 Feb 2006 20:12:32 GMT
I totally agree. Also, those writing books should have an RDBMS backend 
for examples. I have read books (and recommended to my students), which 
are really really informative, but they dont show things like 
configuring a db, mapping to a db(RDBMS) etc. I understand that this was 
an issue earlier because mapping was more vendor specific. JDO 2  gives 
an opportunity for book writers to show a complete end to end picture of 
JDO.

David Jordan wrote:

>The hype is EJB3 because the EJB 3 community is busy writing articles about
>it. Some I have read make it sound like object persistence is brand new,
>such BS. Those backing JDO need to start writing articles about JDO 2.0 and
>when EJB 3 is finalized, it would be great to have articles that do a
>side-by-side comparison of the two standards.
>
>David Jordan
>Object Identity, Inc.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: erik@jpox.org [mailto:erik@jpox.org] 
>Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 2:19 PM
>To: 'Apache JDO project'; 'JDO Expert Group'
>Subject: RE: Associations with attributes/roles
>
>Eric,
>
>  
>
>>I agree we could always find a mapping that would solve that particular
>>case.
>>But should we do it?
>>    
>>
>
>IMO, yes. In the past, I perceived JDO been promoted to cope with any model.
>I propose this mapping be standardized in future releases, of course, if
>vendors will continue to invest in JDO, JPOX will.
>
>Nowadays, the hype is EJB3.
>
>
>
>  
>

-- 
Karan Singh


Mime
View raw message