jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Boni Gopalan (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (JCR-1760) Review the OCM API and annotations to be more compliant with JPA
Date Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:12:44 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1760?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12638971#action_12638971

Boni Gopalan commented on JCR-1760:

I feel JPA compliance is the right direction and is an useful extension.  The hard work is
already done through the OCM layer.  We need to evaluate whether an EntityManager using OCM
to expose JCR is the right approach.  Incidently on yesterday's lazy sunay afternoon I started
writing a Jpa4Jcr API layer.  My strategy is to use OCM as the first cut implementation and
then evaluate the performance.  As you have rightly pointed out Query mapping is going to
be the most crucial aspect.  

> Review the OCM API and annotations to be more compliant with JPA
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: JCR-1760
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1760
>             Project: Jackrabbit
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: jackrabbit-ocm
>    Affects Versions: 1.5
>            Reporter: Christophe Lombart
> It should be possible to start smoothly the JPA support. Of course, all JPA features
are not necessary in the JCR world. For example, the annotations @Table and @Column are not
very useful for OCM :-). Nevertheless, using almost the same API and a subset of the JPA annotations
could be a great help for people who knows the JPA specification. 
> Here is a list of changes that we can do quickly : 
> - Rename the ObjecContentManager into EntityManager and review some method names. 
> - Rename the OCM annotations : 
> @Node => @Entity 
> @Field => @Basic
> @Bean => @OneToOne
> @Collection => @OneToMany. Furthermore, @Collection is not a good name because it
also supporting Maps :-) 
> I would like to wait for the JPA query because the upcoming JPA spec will add more flexibility
in this area. 
> After, we can review in more details the JPA specification and see if there is a real
interest to be more conform to this specification.  
> What do you think about that ? Please, add your comments. thanks 

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message