Mailing-List: contact users-help@openjpa.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@openjpa.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of michael.d.dick@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.220.161 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        b=rQTD7vv9oQLS4TRGo31DhR6+zI7KhogVHI+tsppGp997NfgeeqY239amuWk/PcM+YN
         nBqSVbsurWCyby6/9xi6N+IkvcWYzSpMxzpEC5jR+NiteebFSJpQeFxUxpzM171z8f36
         YMB3JZWLIsTp5CBdPM+Oo2RdW6hYupburEDrY=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <49AEB2F2.6010802@cyberspaceroad.com>
References: <49AEB2F2.6010802@cyberspaceroad.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 13:39:39 -0600
Message-ID: <72c1350f0903041139r2fe6d5den5c77161f8943a937@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Quick question re date, time,
 timestamp or java.util.Date/Calendar
From: Michael Dick <michael.d.dick@gmail.com>
To: users@openjpa.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c5b15466f3b40464503662

--001636c5b15466f3b40464503662
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Adam,

Looks like we're less stringent about the @Temporal annotation. I'd have to
look closer to see that's the case.

Regarding the JPA 2.0 spec you can find a copy of the public review draft
here http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/pr/jsr317/index.html

-mike

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:57 AM, Adam Hardy <adam.sql@cyberspaceroad.com>wrote:

>
> I converted my project over from java.util.Date to java.sql.Timestamp for
> entity fields after I figured that would give me more room to maneuver with
> a new requirement for time fields.
>
> It went smoothly with OpenJPA and made the MVC layer's type converter code
> a cinch to refactor.
>
> However I then ran my tests under Hibernate JPA and Toplink Essentials, and
> both complained bitterly that I was violating the spec and threw exceptions.
>
> Looking through the JPA 1 spec, I see where I have transgressed (9.1.20):
>
> "The Temporal annotation must be specified for persistent fields or
> properties of type java.util.Date and java.util.Calendar. It may only be
> specified for fields or properties of these types."
>
> Is the OpenJPA interpretations deliberately including Timestamp or is that
> considered an OpenJPA feature?
>
> Is there any change in JPA 2?
>
> Also, can anyone give a URL for the JPA 2 spec pdf? Google turned up
> nothing.
>
>
> Thanks
> Adam
>

--001636c5b15466f3b40464503662--