db-jdo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andy Jefferson <a...@jpox.org>
Subject Re: JDO2 Annotations
Date Fri, 21 Jul 2006 11:52:18 GMT
> The Solution we want to propose is based on 2.
> 1. JDO2 should define an own clear set of Annotations
>     * JDO2 Annotations are splitted in two seperated sets with two
> indipendent packages
>     * Persistence JDO2  Annotation are defined based on the *.jdo
> definition
>     * Mapping JDO2 Annotations are defined based on the *.orm definition

Clear definition would be good for 2 reasons.
1. Clear dividing line for implementations who don't support ORM
2. Clear definition for users to avoid specifying deployment-level info in 
annotations, whilst allowing them the flexibility of doing so if they so 

The only differences from the current JPOX set are packaging (trivial), and 
separating out some of the attributes into their own ORM annotation ... e.g 
PersistenceCapable has catalog, schema, table attributes, whereas they would 
need pulling out into an ORM annotation.

> 2. JDO2 should define interopability with EJB3/JPA
>     * Use of EJB3/JPA Annotations
>     * Mapping of EJB3/JPA to JDO2 Annotations
>     * Assumed defaults on missing or different Annotations


Java Persistent Objects - JPOX

View raw message