You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agsoftware.dnsalias.com> on 2003/07/21 01:14:38 UTC
OJB and Cocoon
Hi:
I already do contact with the Apache OJB community. My idea is to use OJB
instead of Hibernate.
Here is the last mail from the communication with the project leader of
OJB community.
Comments are welcome. :)
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo.
-------- Mensaje Original --------
Asunto: Re: How to know when the CVS changes?
De: Thomas Mahler
Fecha: Sab, 19 de Julio de 2003, 5:30
Para: Antonio Gallardo
Hi again Antonio,
Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> Hi Thomas:
>
> Thanks. The tutorial note was confusing to me. I understanded that JDO
> is not done yet or not full functional as a warning: "maybe some parts
> still will not work". But now I understand I can work with OJB using
> JDO.
Yes, it's all working!
> As I noted before, I am here (in OJB project), trying to integrate OJB
> in the "model" side of a Movel-View-Controller approach. The idea is
> to show how can use OJB into Cocoon. I think since the both projects
> are in the same Apache umbrella, Cocoon people will support it if this
> is feasible.
Yes, that's a great idea.
There are several similar aproaches in different apache projects right
now: - The Jetspeed 2.0 implementation will be completely rewritten to
use OJB as the model layer.
- The Jakarta Turbine project provides support for OJB as it's default
model layer. The former persistence layer used in Turbine, Torque, has
several limitations that are solved by OJB. Now Torque is mainly used as
a code generation engine to generate code and database tables for
persistent classes in OJB.
- OJB works very well as a model layer in Struts. There are now several
books on STruts available, that recommend OJB as the persistence layer
of choice.
> Currently some Cocoon user are using Hibernate, and everybody is
> recommending it. But maybe I am the the "black sheep" of Cocoon
> Community that is trying the other way and use OJB. I believe in JDO
> and since OJB support JDO. I am trying to work with both. By the way
> since Hibernate is LGPL, the Cocoon Commmunity has concerns about
> that.
Sure, LGPL is not an option for us. Hibernate is OK. but OJB can do
everything that Hibernate can do and it can do much more! I think the
compliance to standard persistence API's like JDO, ODMG and S.O.D.A are
very important. Hibernate only provides proprietary API (They started an
ODMG implementation, but it's far from complete and not a viable
solution).
>
> I think connection OJB-Cocoon will be a win-win relation for both
> projects.
>
I absolutely agree with you! It's good for us if a world-class framework
like Cocoon uses our code. And Coccon will also benefit, as
collaboration with another Apache team will be much smoother than with
the Hibernate project. And you won't face any LGPL license issues.
> I will comment you about how well or how bad (I hope never it will be)
> is the sample.
don't hesitate to ask if you have further questions, I'm happy to help
you getting started.
> I hope when the integration will work fine and cocoon will be
> presented also as a web application framework and there will be OJB,
> then OJB community will have a boost! :) I hope I would happen. :)
Yes, that would really be good news for Apache as a whole.
> Please comments about that.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Antonio Gallardo.
Re: OJB and Cocoon
Posted by Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agsoftware.dnsalias.com>.
Hi:
Sorry, but I am reviewing old mails. ;-D
This mail was wrote recently and cleary present the position of Hibernate
Team about to not change the LGPL license. See this post in a OJB list:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.ojb.user/10414/match=lgpl
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo.
PS: The below mail was in time when Stefano was having good times in
Guayaquil. ;-D
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo.
Stefano Mazzocchi dijo:
>
> On Monday, Jul 21, 2003, at 04:26 America/Guayaquil, Ugo Cei wrote:
>
>> Antonio Gallardo wrote:
>>> Hi:
>>> I already do contact with the Apache OJB community. My idea is to use
>>> OJB
>>> instead of Hibernate.
>>> Here is the last mail from the communication with the project leader
>>> of
>>> OJB community.
>>> Comments are welcome. :)
>>
>> Being one of the foremost proponents of Hibernate, I'd like to add my
>> 0.02 .
>>
>> I chose to go with Hibernate for our in-house projects some time ago
>> and I'm very happy with it, licensing issues notwithstanding (we
>> aren't distributing any of our code, so we haven't any problem with
>> the (L)GPL, at the moment). In performing our evaluation, one of the
>> most important factors was the perception that there was an active
>> community around Hibernate. This did not appear to be the case with
>> OJB, at least from the website. I'm happy to hear that OJB is
>> progressing along nicely instead. Competition can be a good thing
>> (even though maybe "coopetition" would be better).
>>
>> As far as Cocoon is concerned, there is really no reason why we should
>> "choose" a persistence framework over another one. Properly layered
>> web applications should not mix concerns too much between layers. This
>> is why I refrain from accessing any persistence-related code from the
>> view layer. I'm not going so far as to create an encapsulation of the
>> persistence mechanism that would allow me to change it without
>> changing the client code, since I think it would be overkill (KISS!),
>> but referring to Hibernate/OJB/whatever APIs from the flow only,
>> directly or indireclty, is OK in my book.
>>
>> In other words, I personally see no benefit in developing a generic
>> framework for tieing views to persistence as a Cocoon block or other
>> kind of component. Let the application developers choose their
>> persistence mechanism (straight JDBC, O/R mapping, EJB, ...) according
>> to the specific application needs and give them the tools (flow) to
>> control the interaction between the Model and the View.
>
> I agree with Ugo that we should not choose *one* persistence framework.
> But I, personally, would love to see a complex webapp that uses a
> object-relational persistence layer shipped with cocoon and we can't do
> that with hibernate.
>
> So I welcome any effort that will allow us to show to our users how to
> use object-relational persistence out of the box.
>
> Ah, btw, given the recent (slashdotted) clarification that the FSF
> believes that the LGPL for java is as viral as the GPL, the hibernate
> people might have a *real* reason, now, to get to a more
> cooperation-friendly license.
>
> --
> Stefano.
Re: OJB and Cocoon
Posted by Tony Collen <co...@umn.edu>.
Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> Hi:
>
> Sorry, but I am reviewing old mails. ;-D
>
> This mail was wrote recently and cleary present the position of Hibernate
> Team about to not change the LGPL license. See this post in a OJB list:
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.ojb.user/10414/match=lgpl
Thanks for the update, Antonio. I plan on diving into OJB and object
persistence soon for a project at work. It's probably overkill, but I
need an excuse to learn a new skill ;) Anyway, hopefully I will be able
to come up with a substantial application that Cocoon could benefit
from. I look forward to playing with some new toys soon =
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Antonio Gallardo.
>
> PS: The below mail was in time when Stefano was having good times in
> Guayaquil. ;-D
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Antonio Gallardo.
Regards,
Tony
Re: OJB and Cocoon
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
On Monday, Jul 21, 2003, at 04:26 America/Guayaquil, Ugo Cei wrote:
> Antonio Gallardo wrote:
>> Hi:
>> I already do contact with the Apache OJB community. My idea is to use
>> OJB
>> instead of Hibernate.
>> Here is the last mail from the communication with the project leader
>> of
>> OJB community.
>> Comments are welcome. :)
>
> Being one of the foremost proponents of Hibernate, I'd like to add my
> 0.02 €.
>
> I chose to go with Hibernate for our in-house projects some time ago
> and I'm very happy with it, licensing issues notwithstanding (we
> aren't distributing any of our code, so we haven't any problem with
> the (L)GPL, at the moment). In performing our evaluation, one of the
> most important factors was the perception that there was an active
> community around Hibernate. This did not appear to be the case with
> OJB, at least from the website. I'm happy to hear that OJB is
> progressing along nicely instead. Competition can be a good thing
> (even though maybe "coopetition" would be better).
>
> As far as Cocoon is concerned, there is really no reason why we should
> "choose" a persistence framework over another one. Properly layered
> web applications should not mix concerns too much between layers. This
> is why I refrain from accessing any persistence-related code from the
> view layer. I'm not going so far as to create an encapsulation of the
> persistence mechanism that would allow me to change it without
> changing the client code, since I think it would be overkill (KISS!),
> but referring to Hibernate/OJB/whatever APIs from the flow only,
> directly or indireclty, is OK in my book.
>
> In other words, I personally see no benefit in developing a generic
> framework for tieing views to persistence as a Cocoon block or other
> kind of component. Let the application developers choose their
> persistence mechanism (straight JDBC, O/R mapping, EJB, ...) according
> to the specific application needs and give them the tools (flow) to
> control the interaction between the Model and the View.
I agree with Ugo that we should not choose *one* persistence framework.
But I, personally, would love to see a complex webapp that uses a
object-relational persistence layer shipped with cocoon and we can't do
that with hibernate.
So I welcome any effort that will allow us to show to our users how to
use object-relational persistence out of the box.
Ah, btw, given the recent (slashdotted) clarification that the FSF
believes that the LGPL for java is as viral as the GPL, the hibernate
people might have a *real* reason, now, to get to a more
cooperation-friendly license.
--
Stefano.
RE: OJB and Cocoon
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Reinhard Pötz wrote:
> >
> > In other words, I personally see no benefit in developing a generic
> > framework for tieing views to persistence as a Cocoon block or other
> > kind of component. Let the application developers choose their
> > persistence mechanism (straight JDBC, O/R mapping, EJB, ...)
> > according
> > to the specific application needs and give them the tools (flow) to
> > control the interaction between the Model and the View.
>
> IIUC we are only talking about examples and not *fundamental* Cocoons
> stuff. Hibernate and OJB is IMO exchangeable and as we can put OJB
> libraries into CVS it just easier for us.
>
Yes, but even if *we* are only talking about examples this is often
perceived
by users as the *solution*, so we should really be careful with this.
I totally agree with Ugo, the users (or application developers) should
decide
which persistence mechanism they want to use. Cocoon must be independent
from it.
Carsten
RE: OJB and Cocoon
Posted by Reinhard Pötz <re...@gmx.net>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ugo Cei [mailto:u.cei@cbim.it]
> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 11:26 AM
> To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> Subject: Re: OJB and Cocoon
>
>
> Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> > Hi:
> >
> > I already do contact with the Apache OJB community. My idea
> is to use OJB
> > instead of Hibernate.
> >
> > Here is the last mail from the communication with the
> project leader of
> > OJB community.
> >
> > Comments are welcome. :)
>
> Being one of the foremost proponents of Hibernate, I'd like to add my
> 0.02 €.
>
> I chose to go with Hibernate for our in-house projects some
> time ago and
> I'm very happy with it, licensing issues notwithstanding (we aren't
> distributing any of our code, so we haven't any problem with
> the (L)GPL,
> at the moment). In performing our evaluation, one of the most
> important
> factors was the perception that there was an active community around
> Hibernate. This did not appear to be the case with OJB, at least from
> the website. I'm happy to hear that OJB is progressing along nicely
> instead. Competition can be a good thing (even though maybe
> "coopetition" would be better).
>
> As far as Cocoon is concerned, there is really no reason why
> we should
> "choose" a persistence framework over another one. Properly
> layered web
> applications should not mix concerns too much between layers. This is
> why I refrain from accessing any persistence-related code
> from the view
> layer. I'm not going so far as to create an encapsulation of the
> persistence mechanism that would allow me to change it
> without changing
> the client code, since I think it would be overkill (KISS!), but
> referring to Hibernate/OJB/whatever APIs from the flow only,
> directly or
> indireclty, is OK in my book.
>
> In other words, I personally see no benefit in developing a generic
> framework for tieing views to persistence as a Cocoon block or other
> kind of component. Let the application developers choose their
> persistence mechanism (straight JDBC, O/R mapping, EJB, ...)
> according
> to the specific application needs and give them the tools (flow) to
> control the interaction between the Model and the View.
IIUC we are only talking about examples and not *fundamental* Cocoons
stuff. Hibernate and OJB is IMO exchangeable and as we can put OJB
libraries into CVS it just easier for us.
Cheers,
Reinhard
Re: OJB and Cocoon
Posted by Ugo Cei <u....@cbim.it>.
Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> Hi:
>
> I already do contact with the Apache OJB community. My idea is to use OJB
> instead of Hibernate.
>
> Here is the last mail from the communication with the project leader of
> OJB community.
>
> Comments are welcome. :)
Being one of the foremost proponents of Hibernate, I'd like to add my
0.02 €.
I chose to go with Hibernate for our in-house projects some time ago and
I'm very happy with it, licensing issues notwithstanding (we aren't
distributing any of our code, so we haven't any problem with the (L)GPL,
at the moment). In performing our evaluation, one of the most important
factors was the perception that there was an active community around
Hibernate. This did not appear to be the case with OJB, at least from
the website. I'm happy to hear that OJB is progressing along nicely
instead. Competition can be a good thing (even though maybe
"coopetition" would be better).
As far as Cocoon is concerned, there is really no reason why we should
"choose" a persistence framework over another one. Properly layered web
applications should not mix concerns too much between layers. This is
why I refrain from accessing any persistence-related code from the view
layer. I'm not going so far as to create an encapsulation of the
persistence mechanism that would allow me to change it without changing
the client code, since I think it would be overkill (KISS!), but
referring to Hibernate/OJB/whatever APIs from the flow only, directly or
indireclty, is OK in my book.
In other words, I personally see no benefit in developing a generic
framework for tieing views to persistence as a Cocoon block or other
kind of component. Let the application developers choose their
persistence mechanism (straight JDBC, O/R mapping, EJB, ...) according
to the specific application needs and give them the tools (flow) to
control the interaction between the Model and the View.
Just IMHO,
Ugo
--
Ugo Cei - http://www.beblogging.com/blog/
RE: OJB and Cocoon
Posted by Reinhard Pötz <re...@gmx.net>.
Hi Antonio,
I would like to support (review, commits, coding) your efforts as Apache
Cocoon committer because I'm also very interested in this. So I would
looking forward to working together on this.
I would love to see an example using JXForms/Control Flow/OJB/Hibernate
- but I think that is exactly what you want to do, isn't it? And as
second example I would like to replace the Javascript database
connections in Petstore using OJB.
What do you think?
Cheers,
Reinhard
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Antonio Gallardo [mailto:agallardo@agsoftware.dnsalias.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 1:15 AM
> To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> Subject: OJB and Cocoon
>
>
> Hi:
>
> I already do contact with the Apache OJB community. My idea
> is to use OJB instead of Hibernate.
>
> Here is the last mail from the communication with the project
> leader of OJB community.
>
> Comments are welcome. :)
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Antonio Gallardo.
>
> -------- Mensaje Original --------
> Asunto: Re: How to know when the CVS changes?
> De: Thomas Mahler
> Fecha: Sab, 19 de Julio de 2003, 5:30
> Para: Antonio Gallardo
> Hi again Antonio,
>
> Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> > Hi Thomas:
> >
> > Thanks. The tutorial note was confusing to me. I
> understanded that JDO
> > is not done yet or not full functional as a warning: "maybe
> some parts
> > still will not work". But now I understand I can work with
> OJB using
> > JDO.
>
> Yes, it's all working!
>
> > As I noted before, I am here (in OJB project), trying to
> integrate OJB
> > in the "model" side of a Movel-View-Controller approach.
> The idea is
> > to show how can use OJB into Cocoon. I think since the both
> projects
> > are in the same Apache umbrella, Cocoon people will support
> it if this
> > is feasible.
>
> Yes, that's a great idea.
> There are several similar aproaches in different apache projects right
> now: - The Jetspeed 2.0 implementation will be completely
> rewritten to use OJB as the model layer.
> - The Jakarta Turbine project provides support for OJB as
> it's default model layer. The former persistence layer used
> in Turbine, Torque, has several limitations that are solved
> by OJB. Now Torque is mainly used as a code generation
> engine to generate code and database tables for persistent
> classes in OJB.
> - OJB works very well as a model layer in Struts. There are
> now several books on STruts available, that recommend OJB as
> the persistence layer of choice.
>
>
> > Currently some Cocoon user are using Hibernate, and everybody is
> > recommending it. But maybe I am the the "black sheep" of Cocoon
> > Community that is trying the other way and use OJB. I
> believe in JDO
> > and since OJB support JDO. I am trying to work with both.
> By the way
> > since Hibernate is LGPL, the Cocoon Commmunity has concerns about
> > that.
>
> Sure, LGPL is not an option for us. Hibernate is OK. but OJB
> can do everything that Hibernate can do and it can do much
> more! I think the compliance to standard persistence API's
> like JDO, ODMG and S.O.D.A are very important. Hibernate only
> provides proprietary API (They started an ODMG
> implementation, but it's far from complete and not a viable solution).
>
> >
> > I think connection OJB-Cocoon will be a win-win relation for both
> > projects.
> >
>
> I absolutely agree with you! It's good for us if a
> world-class framework like Cocoon uses our code. And Coccon
> will also benefit, as collaboration with another Apache team
> will be much smoother than with the Hibernate project. And
> you won't face any LGPL license issues.
>
> > I will comment you about how well or how bad (I hope never
> it will be)
> > is the sample.
>
> don't hesitate to ask if you have further questions, I'm
> happy to help you getting started.
>
> > I hope when the integration will work fine and cocoon will be
> > presented also as a web application framework and there
> will be OJB,
> > then OJB community will have a boost! :) I hope I would happen. :)
>
> Yes, that would really be good news for Apache as a whole.
>
> > Please comments about that.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Antonio Gallardo.
>
>
>