From dev-return-9517-apmail-openjpa-dev-archive=openjpa.apache.org@openjpa.apache.org Mon Nov 17 20:42:25 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-openjpa-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 51101 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2008 20:42:25 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 17 Nov 2008 20:42:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 33632 invoked by uid 500); 17 Nov 2008 20:42:33 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-openjpa-dev-archive@openjpa.apache.org Received: (qmail 33608 invoked by uid 500); 17 Nov 2008 20:42:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@openjpa.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@openjpa.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@openjpa.apache.org Received: (qmail 33597 invoked by uid 99); 17 Nov 2008 20:42:33 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:42:33 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.4 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS,WHOIS_MYPRIVREG X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kwsutter@gmail.com designates 209.85.132.251 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.132.251] (HELO an-out-0708.google.com) (209.85.132.251) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 20:41:08 +0000 Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c3so1018496ana.18 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:41:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=xR+SbapeZ5wKEH63sQ4aCfPmOHjU2sFFwXWkfVeydrs=; b=CFCufUyVIcKPb+cTEDdJIqFH6zyAMjoXyhMHwlVYg2zeojr2YDKi8lutsE4BLgMKkE bpozoyyMmmrQJEhmnkCNfM2R6YxO0jQTV7WXPbUFy3Ypdwqzj/sA8SwNZDLh+ur5NNSF Ql9iHy7JmEFOhkiHiUBEPFjXv3pRsBQZ7oHvU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=YN3ru5Ua2J3lW/Klet2o0hdPjI3nvHLYLHpt8LIJY4c7zy3sra6BP/Lf47QXo3Vwr4 qkPmTzUFzqoGMTDT6qBm6Ua703X8hkWUpgvHKiPGWhKbYJAyuVLKWek4DA0t/8Y71BaO ipDcv8KwIAyVKmYqlgtRjgCHlizo4WgO+lQyY= Received: by 10.100.136.18 with SMTP id j18mr1772433and.103.1226954503114; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:41:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.100.132.2 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:41:42 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <89c0c52c0811171241x1d28188ew8ffe701a3ae65a6b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:41:42 -0600 From: "Kevin Sutter" To: dev@openjpa.apache.org Subject: Re: Updating the JPA spec jar for JPA 2.0 In-Reply-To: <1226953407190-1511117.post@n2.nabble.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_38236_501078.1226954503105" References: <1226940754024-1510252.post@n2.nabble.com> <2B45F593-7D6F-4403-9147-888F03E48FA9@yahoo.com> <1226953407190-1511117.post@n2.nabble.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_38236_501078.1226954503105 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Pinaki Poddar wrote: > > > What relevance does this possible EG sourced jar have to this > > discussion? My understanding was that you wouldn't use it even if it > > existed. > > If JPA EG has released source for JPA 2.0 API, then it provides a > checkpoint > for source API we may create independently. Even if the Expert Group would provide source, we (OpenJPA, Geronimo, etc) would not want to use it due to licensing concerns. We have to base our API code off of the specification itself. That is, create the source parts based off the text in the specification. > > > I have no problem applying patches promptly and pushing snapshots. > OK let us try one iteration with a small patch to see how does that this > process go. I am attaching a patch for new Criteria API definitions. > http://n2.nabble.com/file/n1511117/jpa2.0-update-1.0-patch.txt > jpa2.0-update-1.0-patch.txt > > This patch is an overlay over > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/trunk/geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec/src/main/ > Although David might be a nice guy and accept this patch, the normal process would be just like somebody contributing to OpenJPA -- you would attach a patch to the JIRA issue. Based on this string of notes, it looks like Jeremy had created JIRA Issue GERONIMO-4410 ( https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4410). So, I would think you should post the patch to that JIRA Issue. Personally, I would rather see us develop the first cut at OpenJPA first and then post our tested version to the Geronimo Issue. We could easily create the first cut in our "sandbox", ensure everything builds and tests, and then provide the patch to Geronimo. Thanks, Kevin > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/Updating-the-JPA-spec-jar-for-JPA-2.0-tp1482013p1511117.html > Sent from the OpenJPA Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > ------=_Part_38236_501078.1226954503105--