OK Christian Ready to go... Il 21/apr/2015 06:57, "Christian Schneider" <ch...@die-schneider.net> ha scritto:
> The tests work well with your complete sources. I observed that the > hibernate test worked and the eclipselink test failed when I ran the tests > against > my original sources. I just wondered why the two persistence frameworks > behaved differently. > > I like the way you solved the problem with the EntityManager properties. > It allows the code to access the transaction type at any time while the > service properties would have to be forwarded in a custom way. > > I know we are not yet feature complete. The reason why I think we should > now ask about the future of aries jpa is that at apache the community > should be involved from the start. So we should not wait till the code is > completely polished. Of course we are already working in the open and > everyone can engage but the code currently is on > github which is not the common procedure at apache. > > If people are unsure we can also put our current code into a branch and do > the switch on trunk at a later time. > > Christian > > On 20.04.2015 23:56, Giuseppe Gerla wrote: > >> First of all let me say that it's quite strange the behaviour that you >> described about tests. On my pc all tests run ok. I have only an excpetion >> during hibernate test due to class not found HibernateProxy (I think >> during >> class enhancement). So I think that we have to investigate better... but >> how? On my machine I have no error on testCache. >> >> About the transaction type, I first thinked to put it in the osgi service >> properties map, but there was some problems to retrieve it in the >> JpaInterceptor class. So finally I move it in the EMF map. However the JPA >> implementation ususally checks JPA standard property and then custom >> property. A not known property is not processed or generate only a >> warning. >> >> Finally, I think that we are well advanced, but I'm not sure that we are >> ready... I have some doubt on weaving functionality. >> However we can start to ask to the community and in parallel I can try to >> add some other tests. >> >> 2015-04-20 18:37 GMT+02:00 Christian Schneider <ch...@die-schneider.net>: >> >> Btw. No need for a pull request. I already merged your fork. >>> What do you think about the current state of the code? >>> I think we are ready to ask the aries community if this could be the base >>> for the next >>> major version. >>> >>> If we get green light I would propose to create a branch on aries for the >>> current state of the jpa code which >>> could then be used for maintenance. Our new code could then become the >>> trunk and when we reach a good quality would >>> be the aries jpa 2.0.0 version. >>> >>> WDYT? >>> >>> Christian >>> >>> On 19.04.2015 09:54, Giuseppe Gerla wrote: >>> >>> Hi Christian >>>> I checked code about exception raised during integration test in Karaf >>>> and >>>> I found an issue on transaction type retrieving method. Using magaed >>>> exception, eclipselink (but I think also hibernate) set transaction >>>> manager >>>> in rollback only state and this do fail the test. >>>> To avoid this behaviour I put the transaction type in the properties map >>>> of >>>> EntitiManagerFactory and then, when it is needed, I get it from the map. >>>> >>>> I also change integration tests to manage the same service and same >>>> functionality with several implementation (eclipselink and hibernate). >>>> Now >>>> we have an example of my use case. >>>> >>>> Before I open a pull request, I'd like to know wdyt. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>> Christian Schneider >>> http://www.liquid-reality.de >>> >>> Open Source Architect >>> http://www.talend.com >>> >>> >>> > > -- > Christian Schneider > http://www.liquid-reality.de > > Open Source Architect > http://www.talend.com > >
