From dev-return-9495-apmail-openjpa-dev-archive=openjpa.apache.org@openjpa.apache.org Tue Nov 11 18:55:33 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-openjpa-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 73108 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2008 18:55:33 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 11 Nov 2008 18:55:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 76890 invoked by uid 500); 11 Nov 2008 18:55:39 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-openjpa-dev-archive@openjpa.apache.org Received: (qmail 76868 invoked by uid 500); 11 Nov 2008 18:55:39 -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 76841 invoked by uid 99); 11 Nov 2008 18:55:39 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 10:55:39 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [98.136.44.59] (HELO smtp104.prem.mail.sp1.yahoo.com) (98.136.44.59) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:54:16 +0000 Received: (qmail 6851 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2008 18:54:59 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-Id:From:To:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Mime-Version:Subject:Date:References:X-Mailer; b=V1cpqvWJTKg4O+rf57Fys4G0bMiG9nMeHeEYmBhlSY2/nWRtHte3D4iQlweE5DrsGPBkM5pxZbm3N+Abt2IH66kbae0g2QPUgwqiQxA64TxBGkCSsS5nXCQS82Kav+SXgXnNxLVLM+m85jWmqGfs3DsiUdNrSYJmaxg7F/CEeaM= ; Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.11.55.40?) (david_jencks@63.105.20.225 with plain) by smtp104.prem.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Nov 2008 18:54:59 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: cBZtU68VM1moyC0pGqnO54okTZRy0wbwgAp2UQPxkeviH1f4UIEkCIqvdkRVxgLCBMTxH70A8O1uzJ0co5FdGa6Feeqtx33c_23etYKRCy6Y1d67_EdHaBPsqhFMdSza4.SJnJ6G3MDvWfcIlqGUVVdoL38TKbjENneDnp_Y2qhMbXiVq8_NMNkKuKE- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 Message-Id: From: David Jencks To: dev@openjpa.apache.org, "Geronimo Dev List (JIRA)" In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2) Subject: Re: Updating the JPA spec jar for JPA 2.0 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 10:54:57 -0800 References: <635003.66808.qm@web27808.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org 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 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 >> geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec >> with a >> 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 >> 2.0-SNAPSHOT >> 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-_org.apache.geronimo.specs geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec 2.0-EA-SNAPSHOT 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 org.apache.geronimo.specs geronimo-jpa_2.0_spec 1.0-EA-SNAPSHOT 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! >