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: Rename property PersistenceUnitName to Name
Date Wed, 06 Jun 2007 06:12:52 GMT
On 6 June  2007 07:04, Andy Jefferson wrote:
> > I now believe that the "PersistenceUnit" part of the property name is
> > distracting, and the real property name should be simply "Name". That
> > is, PersistenceManagerFactories can have a Name property. The javadoc
> > and other documentation can call out that this name is the same as
> > the PersistenceUnit name in JPA, but I don't think that there is
> > value in calling it PersistenceUnitName.
> So now we would only have the "named PMF" specified via a PMF property to
> support and implementations wouldn't be required to support reading of JPA
> "persistence.xml" ?
> I thought the general idea was to have more read-across between JPA and JDO
> - ok having a "named PMF" does have its equivalent in JPA clearly, but
> users can't then just take an existing "persistence.xml" file and a
> <persistence-unit> contained within it and use it under JDO. Or maybe I
> misunderstand your proposal

Or maybe you intend that an implementation supports both, and that the same 
name is used for both. But in that case how does the implementation know 
which it should go for ? What if a named PMF *and* a named "persistence-unit" 
exists for the supplied name - does "jdo.xml" take precedence over 
"persistence.xml", or vice-versa?

Andy  (Java Persistent Objects - http://www.jpox.org)

View raw message