openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Michael Dick" <mik...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Updating the JPA spec jar for JPA 2.0
Date Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:50:15 GMT
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:07 PM, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell@sun.com>wrote:

>
> On Nov 11, 2008, at 2:28 AM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>
>  --- David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com> schrieb am Di, 11.11.2008:
>>
>>> This points out the possible problem that the jpa 1.0 spec
>>> appeared to be part of the ejb 3.0 spec so I gave it a spec
>>> version number of 3.0.  Any suggestions about what to do
>>> about this would be appreciated.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Do we really need to change anything?
>>
>> Imho the current
>> <artifactId> geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec
>> with a
>> <version> 1.0
>> is somehow not really maven stylish, but it doesn't hinder us ;)
>> The version of the jpa-spec actually is 1.0 and we do not have any problem
>> other than the confusing term '3.0' in the groupId since this references EJB
>> and not JPA.
>>
>> So I'd suggest to simply use
>> <version>2.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
>> and we're done.
>>
>
> Yes, this would be the thing to do.
>
> The original JPA was released as part of EJB, which had gotten to the 3.0
> level. But JPA was brand, spanking new 1.0.
>
> The current JPA specification (JSR 317, now in Public Review Draft stage)
> is being billed as JPA Version 2.0. So 2.0-SNAPSHOT seems completely
> correct.
>
> So even though it's confusing because of the original geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec
> nomenclature, I'd say we confuse things even more if we change the artifact
> id or group id (again).
>

That's easiest for migration. It's unfortunate that geronimo-jpa_x.y_spec
doesn't follow the same pattern as the other geronimo specs though.  I have
no strong feelings either way though.

We might want to keep the EA nomenclature so 2.0-EA-SNAPSHOT or
2.0-SNAPSHOT-EA could be the current version. Once the spec finalizes
2.0-SNAPSHOT seems fair.

-mike


> Craig
>
>>
>>
>> Humm, btw, what's really confusing me now is the fact, that there are 2
>> specs online:
>> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/geronimo/specs/
>> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/geronimo-spec/
>>
>> I've always used the geronimo-spec until now, and this doesn't contain the
>> jpa spec anyway.
>>
>> So could someone shed a light on this for me (I'm not a geronimized one)?
>>
>> txs and LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> Craig L Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message