[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] [DISCUSS] Include Jakarta Data in EE 11
|
Oliver/all,
If you look at what Emily and/or I recently presented at JCON
Europe and DWX last month:
https://speakerdeck.com/keilw/dwx23-jakarta-data-standardized-data-access-for-sql-and-nosql-databases
What was raised in https://github.com/jakartaee/data/issues/109
is addressed as Nathan also said, and only part of an
implementation-specific extension by IBM. Just like Hibernate or
EclipseLink have certain extensions to the JPA spec.
Werner
On 13.07.2023 15:54, Nathan Rauh via
jakartaee-platform-dev wrote:
Oliver,
I hope the
following comment that you posted is just a misunderstanding
of what has actually gone into the spec vs. what was under
discussion but not actually included,
> In other words: the
problem we see is not the lack of features but the scope
already exceeding what's been established in the industry.
This would add more complexity to our projects with no
apparent benefits. Given the current state of affairs there
are no plans for Spring Data to implement the specification.
Regarding
the instances you cited of exceeding what vendors currently
do:
https://github.com/jakartaee/data/issues/109
- It’s true this would have been a major addition that
exceeds what vendors do. It was discussed a lot. It was
very contentious with a lot of disagreement over it.
Consequently, it never went into the spec. This should not
in any way be blocking Spring from implementing Jakarta Data
because this proposal isn’t part of Jakarta Data.
https://github.com/jakartaee/data/issues/94
- This one confuses me because it’s just an extra
annotation that does exactly the same thing that the OrderBy
keyword already does, and I can’t see how something so
trivial could cause trouble to Spring Data. Hopefully the
real reason was the mistaken belief that 109 had gone into
the spec, not this change. There was certainly disagreement
on whether this annotation should be taken out of the spec
that went on for some time, I thought we had ultimately
resolved it on one of the Jakarta Data calls, which included
both Graeme and Otavio (apparently no one from Spring must
have been on that particular call). If this truly does
somehow block Spring from implementing Jakarta Data, or if
Spring just feels so strongly about it that you would forgo
implementing Jakarta Data over it, then we’ll just take it
out of the spec for you. Please follow up with me on that
(either one this email chain or separately) and we’ll get it
taken care of.
Hi,
> On 13. Jul 2023, at 13:47, Werner Keil via
jakartaee-platform-dev
<jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> You keep speaking "for Micronaut" and Graeme, …
I don't. I was referring to tickets in which he
expressed the same concerns as we did (links included
in the original message). That certainly doesn't mean
the Micronaut team can't come to a different
conclusion.
I am not even arguing technical direction (anymore).
All I was trying to do is clarify on the assumption
that Spring Data would plan to implement the
specification. And I thought I'd share a few details
why that is.
> Why don't you try the same?
What exactly? Take part in the discussion? That's what
we do / did, as is apparent from the tickets I linked.
Cheers,
Ollie
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev