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.
