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 kwsutter@gmail.com designates
 209.85.212.46 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=WdkQMF0aT7/PrtYcOlzqlyjzUqMBFlnTetioPFilx2xhsvF3ZsqFnYq2v8T46H7mfp
         250gs88Dd/1C32mlvItCttZVKDj6M7vMWbTS8WdWW8EzPtV6Qw8FKazfGAcbmx9xAEVo
         PTJEij59bLeaclT4thj9QiEO6Ntsu2f7lTU1g=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinNqE7UaNMIg6qcAJhF5t7o-u5bI5pIXBpPRn1H@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00b401caf113$f9331e70$eb995b50$@com>
	 <AANLkTilEHu51gmf0a6fffuTnAh0EYI1wZSvZjG4-26dc@mail.gmail.com>
	 <AANLkTinNqE7UaNMIg6qcAJhF5t7o-u5bI5pIXBpPRn1H@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 10:21:40 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTikd_gTmhOg6tEEVtZB8RgtkilyKdvkrWZxE9OMp@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: JPA 3.0
From: Kevin Sutter <kwsutter@gmail.com>
To: users@openjpa.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00c09f9057610cf8fb0486531550

--00c09f9057610cf8fb0486531550
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi Christopher,
You're right, annotations can be verbose.  But, they don't have to be.  It
all depends on whether your application can live with the default processing
defined by the spec.  We tried to pick the most common default values for
the various annotation elements.  If your application can live with the
default processing, then all that is really necessary is the @Entity and @Id
annotations.  But, most legacy applications and schemas can not live with
the default settings, thus the annotations can become verbose.  Flexibility
can be a killer...  But, then we'd be crucified if we didn't allow for the
flexibility...  :-)

The annotations can also be overridden via orm.xml declarations.  This would
keep your base code more readable, while putting the detailed gorp into the
xml file(s).  Maybe this would be more suitable for your environment.

Not sure what you mean by "fluent API".  Any specific examples to help with
this discussion?

Thanks,
Kevin

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 10:10 AM, Christopher Gardner <
chris.r.gardner@gmail.com> wrote:

> Vis-a-vis all JPA specs, streamlining annotations would be nice.  The
> annotations can be verbose.  Maybe a fluent API would be in order.
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Kevin Sutter <kwsutter@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Chris,
> > Sorry to hear that you are frustrated with JPA 2.0.  Can you elaborate?
> >  The
> > JPA Expert Group is currently soliciting feedback for the next revision
> of
> > the JPA spec (2.x or 3.0).  Here's the e-mail address for this
> > correspondence [1].  But, if there are distinct improvements that are you
> > looking for, maybe they could be entertained by the OpenJPA community
> > first.  Bugs and/or Features can be entered into our JIRA system [2] for
> > future consideration.  Of course, community involvement can help speed up
> > this process.
> >
> > Thanks for the input,
> > Kevin
> >
> > [1]  jsr-317-feedback@sun.com
> > [2]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA
> >
> > On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 9:12 AM, C N Davies <cnd@cndavies.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm so frustrated by JPA 2.0 but can't seem to find an JSR for JPA 3 or
> > > anything. Can anyone point me it?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks J
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

--00c09f9057610cf8fb0486531550--