[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-846?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17912289#comment-17912289
]
Tilmann Zäschke commented on JDO-846:
-------------------------------------
{{javax.persistence}}
This package doesn't seem to be referenced in the API. However supporting it
would require implementations to support Jakarta as specified, for example in
chapter 8.7 in the JDO spec in order to accept injection of Jakarta's
{{EntityManager}} via
{{META-INF/services/javax.persistence.EntityManagerFactory}}.
{{javax.transaction}}
The only use of this in the API is the {{javax.transaction.Synchronization}}
class in JDO's {{Transaction}} class.
There are two affected methods:
* {{void setSynchronization(Synchronization sync);}}
* {{Synchronization getSynchronization();}}
The first could be overloaded with {{void
setSynchronization(jakarta.transaction.Synchronization sync);}}
The second method would need a different name, e.g.
{{getSynchronizationJakarta()}}.
Questions:
- Could/should we make support of Jakarta optional? That would make it easier
for implementations.
- Jakarta's Transaction/Persistence API appears to be Java 8 compatible, but
that needs to be verified.
- Depending on the two questions above, qe could introduce Jakarta's API in a
minor release e.g. JDO 3.3
> Check upgrade references from javax to jakarta
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JDO-846
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-846
> Project: JDO
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: api, tck
> Affects Versions: JDO 3.2.1
> Reporter: Michael Bouschen
> Priority: Major
>
> The following packages switched from javax to jakarta:
> * javax.persistence
> * javax.transaction
> We should check whether we can support both packes.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
