db-ojb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert S. Sfeir" <rob...@codepuccino.com>
Subject Re: [OJB 1.1] Status?
Date Thu, 17 Feb 2005 21:45:22 GMT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Feb 17, 2005, at 4:32 PM, Thomas Dudziak wrote:

> I agree with the 1.0.2 & tutorial stuff. If someone explains to me how
> to update the website, then I'll do that once I finished the
> tutorials. No need to wait with the release.

Cool.

On the rest below then it still sounds like 3 releases not 1 regardless 
of what the release number is, do them iteratively and give them to the 
users to use a piece at a time not all of it in one shot, alpha or not.

1.1 1.5, and IoC
1.1.1 xdoclet meta model changes
1.1.2 Rest

The thing is that we have to make a choice as to what is important 
first, they can't all be equally important, even if they were, there is 
a dependency rolling down between them, so push them down iteratively 
by implementation order.  Also iterations should be stable, not alpha, 
an iteration would not be done if the code for that iteration is not 
stable.  What you call it, I really don't care honestly.

R

>
> Regarding the 1.1 however, I don't agree. The two most important
> things are IMO IoC support which already works for Pico and Spring is
> currently out of our hands anyway, and Java 1.5 support. Once these
> two are in place, I'd say we release the first alpha. And I don't
> think Java 1.5 support is much work as its only enum and generic
> collection support at first. Annotations would be nice too, but are
> not a requirement yet I think.
> Equally important are the changes to the metamodel structure which
> require some changes to the repository file and the XDoclet module
> among others.
>
> About HiveMind and Tapestry, I think you misunderstood me. The ability
> to use HiveMind in the same way as we're using Pico/Spring would be
> nice for integration with the upcoming Tapestry 3.1, but this is by no
> means something worth a minor release. For one, it means implementing
> one class (HiveMindComponentContainer) which should be easy enough,
> and HiveMind can wrap Spring bean factories anyway, so OJB should be
> usable even without direct HiveMind integration - at least once Spring
> integration works.
>
> Tom
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFCFRByJhqny0eCHK8RAsrzAJ9sdQKqCXzzeEiMIGx6MeV665apIwCgmROi
oh1ZW5XA6ddQVC9dkbAXFKE=
=KJlc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org


Mime
View raw message