Sounds good to me, I dreaded to have to constantly test on OJB and Hibernate. The original design goal of my persistence layer was to avoid making it specific to a mapper, but if we both take care of one it seems like it's less of an issue.
Regards, Serge...
Edgar Poce wrote:
Hi serge
I'm making major changes in the OJB PM in order to improve performance. I'm trying to remove all the ORM specific objects.
OJB uses transparent persistence: Persistent classes don't have to inherit from a persistent base class or to implement an interface, so I'm using the OJB features to persist the jackrabbit objects directly to the database. Instead of ORM objects I'm using OJB specific features like RowReader and FieldConversion. I think this improvement would tackle most of the "unnecesary complexity issue".
So, you can focus on the hibernate while I work on OJB, WDYT?.
regards edgar
