Hi Armin,
ok, let's say the site specifies something related to that. But maybe it will be more clearer if it's changed to something like this: "immature API, use it on your own risk". In my opinion, "prototype" is a very soft term for the problems that OJB-JDO API hides. Otherwise, probably there will be others who will be mislead in the same way as I did.
Best regards, George.
Armin Waibel wrote:
Hi George,
George Mardale wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Regarding the thread, it is probably my fault. Even though the subject of the email does not specify this, it seems that my emails were constantly attached to existing threads, confusing all of us (I always thought I started new threads). Thanks for pointing this out, anyway....
But I think my greatest disappointment is the fact that I couldn't find something in the OJB documentation specifying that OJB-JDO API is immature and should not be used. Is this really specified in the documentation? I don't remember seeing it...
See OJB status page
http://db.apache.org/ojb/status.html
<snip>
By providing a plugin to the SUN JDO Reference Implementation we provide a complete JDO 1.0.1 prototype O/R mapping tool. A complete Apache licensed JDO implementation is scheduled for OJB 2.0.
</snip>
ok, we don't say it's immature but "prototype" is something along those lines.
regards, Armin
Best regards, George.
Thomas Dudziak wrote:
George Mardale wrote:
In my opinion, very active is a little bit too much to say :-(... For instance, I've asked 4 relative simple questions related to OJB-JDO until now, but no one answered me. Each thread I start seems to be doomed right from the start :-).
Mhmm, just checked the archive (nagoya) and your four posts are there allright though honestly I didn't notice them on the list. But it seems that for three posts you replied to already running threads that dealt with different topics. If thats the case (might also be a problem of the archive software) then please don't do that but rather start a new thread.
Anyway, the normal procedere on this users list is that if somebody can say something about your problem then he/she does so. In the case of your posts which are dealing with the JDO-OJB Api, the problem is that this Api *is* immature (as you've already noticed) and not many people use it so for more advanced scenarios you're in "unexplored country" so to say. Apache recently adopted a specific JDO project which hopefully will be initiated soon, so that this state will be remedied soon. For now, I'd recommend that you use the PB Api which is quite mature, easy to use and performant (nearly as fast as if you'd use JDBC directly). However if you're tied to JDO, then you might want to use a different JDO implementation (e.g. JPOX)
regards, Tom
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
