You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ode.apache.org by Jeff Yu <je...@apache.org> on 2010/06/16 17:07:36 UTC
[VOTE] renaming the JPA's table from ODE_ to BPEL_ as prefix.
Hi team,
This is a follow-up vote for the Rafal's suggestion, which is to try to make
JPA implementation's table schema is as same as possible with the
dao-hibernate module db schema.
This means it would cause users who use OpenJPA will have the db schema
changes dramatically from the 1.3.5 release, in the other hand, the
Hibernate users might just need
to do some small schema update when switching it from native Hibernate to
the JPA Hibernate implementation.
So I think we need an vote here.
Personally, I'd like to have one static schema, given a lot of users choose
hibernate, here is my +1.
Regards
Jeff
--
Cheers,
Jeff Yu
----------------
blog: http://jeff.familyyu.net
Re: [VOTE] renaming the JPA's table from ODE_ to BPEL_ as prefix.
Posted by Tammo van Lessen <tv...@gmail.com>.
No, but in a 1.4 release.
On 17.06.2010 14:15, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> Ok, that sounds like a good idea, but I hope you don't imply to do
> that in a 1.3.x release ?
>
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 01:25, Jeff Yu <je...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The suggestion and discussion happened here:
>> http://ode.markmail.org/message/agdihktklaerqes6?q=change+roadmap
>> As Rafal stated, the benefit would be that easier migration for Hibernate
>> User from native Hibernate to JPA Hibernate,
>> also we can finally drop the dao-hibernate module.
>>
>> I wouldn't think two schemas would be exactly same, but most of the schemas
>> would be same.
>>
>> The other thought for this vote would be trying to know that how many users
>> are really using the OpenJPA,
>> I don't think maintaining two DAO implementation (As they are also some
>> difference between JPA-OpenJPA and JPA-Hibernate database schema)
>> is a very good choice for one project.
>>
>>
>> Regards
>> Jeff
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 6:32 AM, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Which suggestion ? I haven't seen much discussion. It sounds like a
>>> major incompatible change for OpenJPA users. What's the benefit ?
>>> Can the two schema be exactly the same or not ?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 17:07, Jeff Yu <je...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Hi team,
>>>>
>>>> This is a follow-up vote for the Rafal's suggestion, which is to try to
>>> make
>>>> JPA implementation's table schema is as same as possible with the
>>>> dao-hibernate module db schema.
>>>> This means it would cause users who use OpenJPA will have the db schema
>>>> changes dramatically from the 1.3.5 release, in the other hand, the
>>>> Hibernate users might just need
>>>> to do some small schema update when switching it from native Hibernate to
>>>> the JPA Hibernate implementation.
>>>>
>>>> So I think we need an vote here.
>>>>
>>>> Personally, I'd like to have one static schema, given a lot of users
>>> choose
>>>> hibernate, here is my +1.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Jeff
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Jeff Yu
>>>>
>>>> ----------------
>>>> blog: http://jeff.familyyu.net
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cheers,
>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>> ------------------------
>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>>> ------------------------
>>> Open Source SOA
>>> http://fusesource.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Jeff Yu
>>
>> ----------------
>> blog: http://jeff.familyyu.net
>>
>
>
>
--
Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de
Re: [VOTE] renaming the JPA's table from ODE_ to BPEL_ as prefix.
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
Ok, that sounds like a good idea, but I hope you don't imply to do
that in a 1.3.x release ?
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 01:25, Jeff Yu <je...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The suggestion and discussion happened here:
> http://ode.markmail.org/message/agdihktklaerqes6?q=change+roadmap
> As Rafal stated, the benefit would be that easier migration for Hibernate
> User from native Hibernate to JPA Hibernate,
> also we can finally drop the dao-hibernate module.
>
> I wouldn't think two schemas would be exactly same, but most of the schemas
> would be same.
>
> The other thought for this vote would be trying to know that how many users
> are really using the OpenJPA,
> I don't think maintaining two DAO implementation (As they are also some
> difference between JPA-OpenJPA and JPA-Hibernate database schema)
> is a very good choice for one project.
>
>
> Regards
> Jeff
>
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 6:32 AM, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Which suggestion ? I haven't seen much discussion. It sounds like a
>> major incompatible change for OpenJPA users. What's the benefit ?
>> Can the two schema be exactly the same or not ?
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 17:07, Jeff Yu <je...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > Hi team,
>> >
>> > This is a follow-up vote for the Rafal's suggestion, which is to try to
>> make
>> > JPA implementation's table schema is as same as possible with the
>> > dao-hibernate module db schema.
>> > This means it would cause users who use OpenJPA will have the db schema
>> > changes dramatically from the 1.3.5 release, in the other hand, the
>> > Hibernate users might just need
>> > to do some small schema update when switching it from native Hibernate to
>> > the JPA Hibernate implementation.
>> >
>> > So I think we need an vote here.
>> >
>> > Personally, I'd like to have one static schema, given a lot of users
>> choose
>> > hibernate, here is my +1.
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > Jeff
>> >
>> > --
>> > Cheers,
>> > Jeff Yu
>> >
>> > ----------------
>> > blog: http://jeff.familyyu.net
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>> ------------------------
>> Open Source SOA
>> http://fusesource.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Jeff Yu
>
> ----------------
> blog: http://jeff.familyyu.net
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Re: [VOTE] renaming the JPA's table from ODE_ to BPEL_ as prefix.
Posted by Rafal Rusin <ra...@intalio.com>.
Agreed.
Please also note that dao-hibernate will remain for some time (it may
be long) after releasing hibernate-jpa version with upgrade script
from dao-hibernate. This is, because merging current dao-hibernate
features into jpa-hibernate will take some time to implement (and make
equally stable).
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 1:25 AM, Jeff Yu <je...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The suggestion and discussion happened here:
> http://ode.markmail.org/message/agdihktklaerqes6?q=change+roadmap
> As Rafal stated, the benefit would be that easier migration for Hibernate
> User from native Hibernate to JPA Hibernate,
> also we can finally drop the dao-hibernate module.
>
> I wouldn't think two schemas would be exactly same, but most of the schemas
> would be same.
>
> The other thought for this vote would be trying to know that how many users
> are really using the OpenJPA,
> I don't think maintaining two DAO implementation (As they are also some
> difference between JPA-OpenJPA and JPA-Hibernate database schema)
> is a very good choice for one project.
>
>
> Regards
> Jeff
>
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 6:32 AM, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Which suggestion ? I haven't seen much discussion. It sounds like a
>> major incompatible change for OpenJPA users. What's the benefit ?
>> Can the two schema be exactly the same or not ?
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 17:07, Jeff Yu <je...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > Hi team,
>> >
>> > This is a follow-up vote for the Rafal's suggestion, which is to try to
>> make
>> > JPA implementation's table schema is as same as possible with the
>> > dao-hibernate module db schema.
>> > This means it would cause users who use OpenJPA will have the db schema
>> > changes dramatically from the 1.3.5 release, in the other hand, the
>> > Hibernate users might just need
>> > to do some small schema update when switching it from native Hibernate to
>> > the JPA Hibernate implementation.
>> >
>> > So I think we need an vote here.
>> >
>> > Personally, I'd like to have one static schema, given a lot of users
>> choose
>> > hibernate, here is my +1.
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > Jeff
>> >
>> > --
>> > Cheers,
>> > Jeff Yu
>> >
>> > ----------------
>> > blog: http://jeff.familyyu.net
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>> ------------------------
>> Open Source SOA
>> http://fusesource.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Jeff Yu
>
> ----------------
> blog: http://jeff.familyyu.net
>
--
Regards,
Rafał Rusin
http://rrusin.blogspot.com
Re: [VOTE] renaming the JPA's table from ODE_ to BPEL_ as prefix.
Posted by Jeff Yu <je...@gmail.com>.
The suggestion and discussion happened here:
http://ode.markmail.org/message/agdihktklaerqes6?q=change+roadmap
As Rafal stated, the benefit would be that easier migration for Hibernate
User from native Hibernate to JPA Hibernate,
also we can finally drop the dao-hibernate module.
I wouldn't think two schemas would be exactly same, but most of the schemas
would be same.
The other thought for this vote would be trying to know that how many users
are really using the OpenJPA,
I don't think maintaining two DAO implementation (As they are also some
difference between JPA-OpenJPA and JPA-Hibernate database schema)
is a very good choice for one project.
Regards
Jeff
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 6:32 AM, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Which suggestion ? I haven't seen much discussion. It sounds like a
> major incompatible change for OpenJPA users. What's the benefit ?
> Can the two schema be exactly the same or not ?
>
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 17:07, Jeff Yu <je...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi team,
> >
> > This is a follow-up vote for the Rafal's suggestion, which is to try to
> make
> > JPA implementation's table schema is as same as possible with the
> > dao-hibernate module db schema.
> > This means it would cause users who use OpenJPA will have the db schema
> > changes dramatically from the 1.3.5 release, in the other hand, the
> > Hibernate users might just need
> > to do some small schema update when switching it from native Hibernate to
> > the JPA Hibernate implementation.
> >
> > So I think we need an vote here.
> >
> > Personally, I'd like to have one static schema, given a lot of users
> choose
> > hibernate, here is my +1.
> >
> > Regards
> > Jeff
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > Jeff Yu
> >
> > ----------------
> > blog: http://jeff.familyyu.net
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>
--
Cheers,
Jeff Yu
----------------
blog: http://jeff.familyyu.net
Re: [VOTE] renaming the JPA's table from ODE_ to BPEL_ as prefix.
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
Which suggestion ? I haven't seen much discussion. It sounds like a
major incompatible change for OpenJPA users. What's the benefit ?
Can the two schema be exactly the same or not ?
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 17:07, Jeff Yu <je...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi team,
>
> This is a follow-up vote for the Rafal's suggestion, which is to try to make
> JPA implementation's table schema is as same as possible with the
> dao-hibernate module db schema.
> This means it would cause users who use OpenJPA will have the db schema
> changes dramatically from the 1.3.5 release, in the other hand, the
> Hibernate users might just need
> to do some small schema update when switching it from native Hibernate to
> the JPA Hibernate implementation.
>
> So I think we need an vote here.
>
> Personally, I'd like to have one static schema, given a lot of users choose
> hibernate, here is my +1.
>
> Regards
> Jeff
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Jeff Yu
>
> ----------------
> blog: http://jeff.familyyu.net
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Re: [VOTE] renaming the JPA's table from ODE_ to BPEL_ as prefix.
Posted by Rafal Rusin <ra...@intalio.com>.
+1 from me.
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 5:07 PM, Jeff Yu <je...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi team,
>
> This is a follow-up vote for the Rafal's suggestion, which is to try to make
> JPA implementation's table schema is as same as possible with the
> dao-hibernate module db schema.
> This means it would cause users who use OpenJPA will have the db schema
> changes dramatically from the 1.3.5 release, in the other hand, the
> Hibernate users might just need
> to do some small schema update when switching it from native Hibernate to
> the JPA Hibernate implementation.
>
> So I think we need an vote here.
>
> Personally, I'd like to have one static schema, given a lot of users choose
> hibernate, here is my +1.
>
> Regards
> Jeff
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Jeff Yu
>
> ----------------
> blog: http://jeff.familyyu.net
>
--
Regards,
Rafał Rusin
http://rrusin.blogspot.com
Re: [VOTE] renaming the JPA's table from ODE_ to BPEL_ as prefix.
Posted by Tammo van Lessen <tv...@gmail.com>.
+1 (for having _one_ schema for either implementation, also for the
hibernate-dao schema as reference)
Tammo
On 16.06.2010 17:07, Jeff Yu wrote:
> Hi team,
>
> This is a follow-up vote for the Rafal's suggestion, which is to try to make
> JPA implementation's table schema is as same as possible with the
> dao-hibernate module db schema.
> This means it would cause users who use OpenJPA will have the db schema
> changes dramatically from the 1.3.5 release, in the other hand, the
> Hibernate users might just need
> to do some small schema update when switching it from native Hibernate to
> the JPA Hibernate implementation.
>
> So I think we need an vote here.
>
> Personally, I'd like to have one static schema, given a lot of users choose
> hibernate, here is my +1.
>
> Regards
> Jeff
>
--
Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de