+1
Craig L Russell wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > I would not suggest we remove the Hibernate implementation from Roller. > > That should not stop us from adding a datamapper persistence > implementation, thereby removing the hard dependency on Hibernate and > satisfying the Apache folks. > > Craig > > On Aug 15, 2006, at 5:28 PM, Jeff Blattman wrote: > >> given that JDO's future is unclear* (at best) and JPA is unproven* >> (are there any robust production tested implementations yet?), i would >> think that a "wait and see" approach would be most prudent. >> >> * = craig would know much better than i, i think >> >> i think that all things being equal it'd be better to not have the >> hibernate dependency, but it doesn't seem like now would be the right >> time to switch. if you're going to do this, make sure you won't be >> contemplating it again in 6 months. >> >> now, if folks want to put start putting things together in sandbox, by >> all means ... maybe by the time 3.x is ready, things will be clear >> >> Allen Gilliland wrote: >>> >>> So maybe it's time to ask the question more squarely ... who wants to >>> replace Hibernate as our persistence implementation? >>> >>> -- Allen >>> > > Craig Russell > Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo > 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! >
