openjpa-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Beer <>
Subject Re: OpenJPA support for JPA 2.1: when?
Date Fri, 14 Jun 2013 21:16:44 GMT
Hi Kevin

I think that OpenJPA is great and the way it stuck to JPA 2.0 Standard 
so quick was very good. As I am looking more and more into the JEE  and 
the desktop side of things is just as important to me, world it would be 
great to keep the provider I know so well. I am may even be able to help 
in the future as well as I once did before for some documentation and bugs.

I am definitely interested in helping if I can keep OpenJPA up to date.


On 14/06/13 17:27, Kevin Sutter wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
> I greatly appreciate your insights.  And, I'm 100% behind you on this.
> OpenJPA has a great, large set of users.  We get feedback from all facets
> of the industry and we try to respond to the best of our ability.  Like the
> squeaky wheel, we pay the most attention to those areas requesting
> attention.  As you've seen, I have tried to generate and gauge interest in
> JPA 2.1.  Mark has expressed some interest and, of course, Pinaki has.
> And, now your note is the strongest worded request for JPA 2.1.  So, it's
> great to hear that there's finally some interest.
> This is totally different from the JPA 2.0 effort.  When that one was
> discussed on the OpenJPA forums, there was much more interest from a
> development perspective with several individuals and teams stepping up --
> coding, testing, id, promotion, etc.  For whatever reason, the interest in
> JPA 2.1 is not as strong.  Since most of us have "day jobs" in addition to
> contributing to open-source, we have to pick what areas to focus on.
> If there is interest in kicking off a real development effort, then we
> should probably move this conversation to the dev mailing list and get the
> development community fired up.
> Anybody else have input?
> Kevin
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 9:52 PM, Matthew Adams <>wrote:
>> responses inline...
>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Kevin Sutter <> wrote:
>>> Good question, Matthew.  This has been brought up a couple of different
>>> times...
>>> So, there's been some interest, but not an overwhelming interest.  Not to
>>> the point of creating a team, figuring out the work effort, and divvying
>> up
>>> the responsibilities.  Contrast that with the JPA 2.0 development effort,
>>> and there was overwhelming community support and participation.  So, I
>>> think there are a handful of us interested in a JPA 2.1 implementation,
>> but
>>> more participation is required.
>>> Pardon my surprise, but that sounds just plain bad.  That kind of
>> sentiment threatens to scare users away, IMHO.  I have always held OpenJPA
>> in high esteem as one of the major, credible implementations because it's
>> always been up to date WRT to the specs (and, let's not kid ourselves, it
>> hails from Kodo JDO).  Frankly, the specs don't move very fast, and at
>> least previews of them are available well in advance of the actual GA
>> releases.
>>> Pinaki has went so far to create a sandbox and start experimenting with
>> an
>>> implementation.  Again, he's a one-man show and can't do it all.  Well,
>> he
>>> probably could, but it would require a bit of work...  :-)
>>> Well, I would have expected a team of folks on this, not just one.  After
>> all, Pinaki was arguing for expanded fetch plan capabilities in the JPA
>> expert group based on OpenJPA's current capabilities -- and rightfully so,
>> I might add.
>> Maybe we should resurrect that [DISCUSSION] topic
>> I think you should.  Especially with any support customers you or the
>> OpenJPA project sponsors may have.
>>> but I'm curious what
>>> features of JPA 2.1 are of most interest to you?  Or, is it just a matter
>>> of being consistent with the latest specification?
>>> One feature that's worth its development weight is fetch plans, which
>> OpenJPA, thanks to its current fetch plan implementation, can implement
>> fairly quickly.  Further, OpenJPA's fetch plan support exceeds JPA's
>> requirement with fetch depth and recursion depth!
>> Additionally, I just happen to be writing an advanced JPA course right now,
>> and customers of this course want to use the JPA implementation in the
>> course that they have settled on in their organization.  It just so happens
>> that the maiden voyage of this course covers JPA 2.1 and is for a customer
>> that is also an OpenJPA customer.  And they're large.  Now, I have to tell
>> them "Sorry, OpenJPA doesn't have plans to implement JPA 2.1".  Can you
>> say, "Bye bye, customer"?  EclipseLink & DataNucleus already implement 2.1,
>> and Hibernate's implementation is in progress.  If not for the technical
>> reasons I gave above, then the need to remain competitive should be enough
>> to have you assemble a crack 2.1 team ASAP.  Don't forget about BatooJPA
>> making noise (claiming top performance, although I take that with a few
>> grains of salt) and the NoSQL JPA implementations (DataNucleus, ObjectDB,
>> and Kundera), not to mention the Spring Data projects.  Like it or not, you
>> are beset on all sides with competition.
>> Just my $0.02, which might just be worth around $0.029 with the interest
>> I've accumulated since working with JDO- & JPA-style lightweight
>> persistence since 1996 and with the expert groups since 2000.
>> Thanks,
>>> Kevin
>>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Matthew Adams <
>>>> wrote:
>>>> When will OpenJPA support JPA 2.1?
>>>> -matthew
>>>> --
>>>> <>
>>>> skype:matthewadams12
>> --
>> <>
>> skype:matthewadams12

View raw message