openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Updating the JPA spec jar for JPA 2.0
Date Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:54:57 GMT

On Nov 11, 2008, at 10:07 AM, Craig L Russell 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).

Well, that's not how the geronimo spec naming scheme works :-/

We have the problem of two more or less independent version  
schemes.... the spec version and the geronimo release version.  We  
decided to put the spec version in the maven artifact id.

geronimo-<spec-name>_<spec-version_spec

and the geronimo release version in the maven version.

So
<groupId>org.apache.geronimo.specs</groupId>
<artifactId>geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec</artifactId>
<version>2.0-EA-SNAPSHOT</version>

would be a 2.0 release of the ejb 3.0/jpa 1.0 spec.

Without agreeing to a basic change in the naming convention I don't  
think there's much alternative to having
<groupId>org.apache.geronimo.specs</groupId>
<artifactId>geronimo-jpa_2.0_spec</artifactId>
<version>1.0-EA-SNAPSHOT</version>

for the jpa 2 specs we're proposing now, the question is what to do  
about the existing and future jars.

>
>
> 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)?

stuff under geronimo-spec is from the antedeluvian maven 1/geronimo  
1.x spec releases and is many years old.  It gets into the maven2  
repository by some kind of magic.

stuff under o.a.g.specs are the specs built with maven2, including all  
the javaee 5 specs.  Most or all of them now also contain osgi  
metadata along with occasional bug fixes.

thanks
david jencks

>>
>>
>> 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
View raw message