openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Phill Moran" <pjmo...@rogers.com>
Subject RE: [VOTE] Graduate from Incubation
Date Fri, 04 May 2007 19:16:25 GMT
Without getting any nastier let me explain. I see a discontinuity in calling the
project OpenJPA if in reality the project implements JDO and so forth.
If we can separate the engine from the API and make the API pluggable/selectable
and the project is planning on implementing other APIs then a name change seems
reasonable as it would not be representative of what we are providing. 
If we are to go down this path then I would further suggest we separate the
engine and implementing APIS into separate jars/packages as it is wasteful an
potentially dangerous to package all implementations together.

That is all this little piece of the community has to say. 

Phill

-----Original Message-----
From: Dain Sundstrom [mailto:dain@iq80.com] 
Sent: May 4, 2007 2:50 PM
To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Graduate from Incubation

On May 4, 2007, at 10:50 AM, Phill Moran wrote:

> Would we then not have to change the overall name from JPA to 
> openPersistence or some such?

That would suck.  I see no reason we would "have to change" the name.  It is a
choice of the community.

> Why not let another project lift out the engine and adapt JDO/SDO/ETC 
> and maybe we remerge the projects later.

I would hate to see a fork.

> Maybe this idea works if we can fully separate the API from the 
> persistence engine as it does not make sense to go into production 
> with several unused API being deployed.

It is already separated.

-dain


Mime
View raw message