Mailing-List: contact dev-help@openjpa.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@openjpa.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kwsutter@gmail.com designates
 64.233.162.233 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=MXW9ScUWEb8X4FBEXzfuGcWZydOM26U/Z3+k10oPREyGDZuWPNVbER9YrzHO9NIbMt09YDOhOKACxGxkeDPYxWh6yOll6ow4ESzB/SnlQgSDfEXZI+cPvjK3lDWFdM4p1sFf9YVc6ZMxnQnSC+3i3u7JtRrGXzeVCdGQJ2pVAGg=
Message-ID: <89c0c52c0708200625w55ca6b85hcc47e08877c9932@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 08:25:18 -0500
From: "Kevin Sutter" <kwsutter@gmail.com>
To: dev@openjpa.apache.org
Subject: Re: API changes
In-Reply-To: <7262f25e0708192345v78e9960fkfe2fd6b52afd4f9e@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_11897_28890720.1187616318209"
References: <7262f25e0708192345v78e9960fkfe2fd6b52afd4f9e@mail.gmail.com>

------=_Part_11897_28890720.1187616318209
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Patrick,
If I was forced to pick one, I would go with FooType, but I am flexible
either way.

Kevin

On 8/20/07, Patrick Linskey <plinskey@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think that I'm mostly done with the API changes -- see OPENJPA-317.
>
> One outstanding issue is a naming problem. Internally, we use a
> 'FooMode' naming structure for lots of our symbolic constants, but the
> JPA spec uses a 'FooType' naming structure for its enums. Which should
> we obey? The most recent patch mostly goes the 'FooType' route.
>
> -Patrick
>
> --
> Patrick Linskey
> 202 669 5907
>

------=_Part_11897_28890720.1187616318209--