RE: Relationships mapped with mapped-by (long)

The scenario that we discussed on the phone for which I had an action item is already addressed in the specification, section 15.3, paragraph 6, bullet point 2: "Conflicting changes include...setting both sides of a one-to-one relationship such that they do not refer to each other" No spec upda

RE: Reflection-based JDO implementations

Don't forget that there is no attachCopy method -- it's makePersistent... 1. Persistent instances must be fully populated when they first become managed, since field accesses are not detectable. This applies to makePersistent, attachCopy, and query.

RE: Proposal: alignment with JPA

You might want to mention that PersistenceManagerFactory is also equivalent to EntityManagerFactory and that PersistenceManager is equivalent to EntityManager. Is there a reason that you didn't capitalize the acronym JTA? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto

RE: Small feature for JDO maintenance release

In order to support this, we must have the ability to define named fetch plans in metadata, and then have the ability apply them to blocks of application code. Definition of a FetchPlan in metadata I would propose that fetch plans can be defined at the element le

RE: Feature proposal for JDO 2.1 maintenance: current DB time

As we discussed on the Fri conf call today, I think that a cleaner solution is to introduce a new function "currentDate()" to JDOQL for this, similar to JDOQL's count/sum/min/max/avg. Further, I would prefer to leave unspecified the resolution of the return value for this (second, tenth of seco

RE: Feature proposal for JDO 2.1 maintenance: current DB time

Hi Erik, I don't think that aligning with JPOX's JDOQL extensions is a goal of the spec. :) While Date has methods like getDay(), getMonth(), etc., and Date's getDate() method returns the day of the month between 1 & 31 (and is deprecated in favor of Calendar.get(Calendar.DAY_OF_MONTH)). The

RE: Feature proposal for JDO 2.1 maintenance: current DB time

> >> I don't think that aligning with JPOX's JDOQL extensions is >a goal of the >> spec. :) > >We can always try :) > >I'm happy with any expression, date(), currentDate(), Date.getDate(), >JDOHelper.getDate(), etc. > > >Quoting Matthew Adams <

RE: [VOTE] Changes to PersistenceManagerFactory

...and mine: +1 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 5:21 PM To: jdo-dev@db.apache.org Cc: JDO Expert Group Subject: Re: [VOTE] Changes to PersistenceManagerFactory

RE: Persistent interface specification clarification

Here is my writeup for discussion tomorrow, addressing the use of a PC interface as a field in a PC class. BEGIN PROPOSAL Metadata requirements for persistence-capable classes that implement or use persistence-capable interfaces For persistence-capable classes that implement pers

[DISCUSS] Convenient PC method introductions

This was discussed on the Feb 23 JDO conf call. Please review and discuss. Overview: Grails is a promising new framework for lightweight, Rails-style development. It uses GORM, which introduces several nice features to persistent objects, but it is hard-coded against Hibernate and won't currentl

[DISCUSS] Named PMF proposal (JDOHelper enhancements)

This is a proposal we discussed on the Fri Feb 23 JDO conf call. Please review and discuss. Overview: Currently, there is no way to bootstrap a JDO implementation completely externally to the source code. The developer is required to provide at least a resource name that identifies a java.util.P

RE: [DISCUSS] Named PMF proposal (JDOHelper enhancements)

Here is the XSD as a work in progress, in a pre-alpha state. Should we create a JIRA issue for this? Email seems nonideal for file management, especially when they're not attached. http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/jdo/jdo-config"; xmlns="http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/jdo/jdo-config";

RE: [DISCUSS] Named PMF proposal (JDOHelper enhancements)

>1. Why call this file javax.jdo.xml ?, why not jdo.xml ?, or >even why not >persistence.xml ? > Call it what you want -- I only proposed these names. I wouldn't call it persistence.xml, as the contents are not the same as the JPA-specified content. If the persistence.xml is found, its contents

RE: [DISCUSS] Named PMF proposal (JDOHelper enhancements)

Inline... >> Call it what you want -- I only proposed these names. I >wouldn't call >> it persistence.xml, as the contents are not the same as the >> JPA-specified content. If the persistence.xml is found, its contents >> are of course interpretable by the JDO implementation >according to our

RE: Named PM in addition to named PMF

Hi Christian, This smells like the userObject property/map allowable on the PM that was present in JDO 1.0 and expanded in JDO 2.0. The only difference, if I understand what you're saying, is that you would be able to get a PM from a PMF by userObject, yes? If so, this would require a method ove

RE: Review of Matthew's patch

Inline... >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 2:09 PM >To: JDO Expert Group; Apache JDO project >Subject: Review of Matthew's patch > >Nice job Matthew. Good code, nice style, we should definitely keep >you on the team. A

RE: Review of Matthew's patch

Michelle, can you please check to see if this is now fixed? >Some files have Windows line endings. This is probably okay >as long as >you have your CVS properties configured properly. See Craig's >2/14/2007 >email to jdo-dev "Subversion eol-style" >

RE: enlistment of native connections for optimistic txs

If the current transaction is optimistic and active, then getDataStoreConnection() should cause the optimistic transaction to be converted to a datastore transaction and the returned object will be enlisted in the newly begun datastore transaction. This is a result that is consistent with the

JDOHelper.isLoaded proposal

Hi everyone, After discussion on today's call, I'm putting forth a proposal to add a method to JDOHelper that allows users to determine whether or not a given object's field is loaded. There are two options to handle implementations that can't support loaded field checking, especially when detac

Re: JDOHelper.getPersistenceManagerFactory section

Note: I created a JIRA issue, JDO-545, for this. This email is just a copy of it... See my changes inline below, enclosed by "<<<" and ">>>", and my comments. -matthew On Oct 1, 2007, at 2:07 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: Javadogs, I've completed the specification update for these method

Re: JDOHelper.getPersistenceManagerFactory section

I thought the list server might drop the patch. See JDO-545 for it. -matthew On Oct 9, 2007, at 11:18 PM, Matthew Adams wrote: Note: I created a JIRA issue, JDO-545, for this. This email is just a copy of it... See my changes inline below, enclosed by "<<<" and "

Re: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, Oct 12 , 9 am PDT

ection and enhancement. [May 25 2007] AI Matthew Adams prepare a proposal with just the basics of schema synchronization with jdo and orm metadata. [May 18 2007] AI Craig update http://wiki.apache.org/jdo/ CurrentDevelopment wiki page [Apr 27 2007] AI Craig review Query API and sen

Re: Vote: Remove/deprecate 'Implements' annotation and XML element

+!, f'shizzle, we need to remizzle & dizzepricate. (I don't know why I wrote my comment using Snooplang. I must be punchy after talking for 4 days straight.) --- cbeams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I haven't fully reviewed this proposal, but I do > know that using > implements/@Implements onl

Re: change signatures for Java5; deprecate uncooperative APIs

+1. Make sure we deprecate the old when adding the new methods. On Oct 14, 2007, at 3:35 AM, Ilan Kirsh wrote: +1 add new methods that move the boolean parameter to be first and change the Object[ ] to Object...; deprecate the uncooperative methods Ilan - Original Message - From:

Re: fetch group question

Hi Karan, Currently, there is no standardized way to dynamically define fetch groups. We'll look into adding this to the specification. You might consider requesting this of your current JDO vendor. Thanks for your feedback! Sincerely, Matthew On Oct 14, 2007, at 7:43 PM, Karan Malhi wr

Re: Subquery specification update

I agree that the candidateCollectionExpression description is a bit cryptic. Boy, it's been a long time since I thought about subqueries. Can we also provide single-string versions of the examples? That would be helpful. -matthew On Oct 25, 2007, at 5:07 AM, Christiaan wrote: Hi Cra

Re: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, Oct 26 , 9 am PDT

n and enhancement. [May 25 2007] AI Matthew Adams prepare a proposal with just the basics of schema synchronization with jdo and orm metadata. [May 18 2007] AI Craig update http://wiki.apache.org/jdo/ CurrentDevelopment wiki page [Apr 27 2007] AI Craig review Query API and send email to ex

Re: multiple databases one PM/TX

osal on annotation overrides for > the expert group. > > [May 25 2007] AI everyone Download the Grails demo from grails.org and > check it out. Also look at Grails/Groovy ExpandoMetaClass that has the > magic to avoid reflection and enhancement. > > [May 25 2007] AI Matth

Re: securing data in JDO

Two things: 1. Spring has never been an all-or-nothing proposition. It goes to great lengths to ensure that only those portions of Spring that provide you value can be used. See http://www.acegisecurity.org/ standalone.html. 2. I don't really think that domain object security is somethin

#key and #value in query filter?

Hi all, I just proposed in JPA on the thread for support for Maps that JPAQL support "#key" and "#value" for navigation through maps, much like we can use "#key" and "#value" to define fetch groups in JDO. I took for granted that these expressions can be used in JDOQL, and after a search

Re: #key and #value in query filter?

local entries will remain in the hash map. I'm not going any further, before your feedback. Cheers, -Message d'origine- De : Matthew Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoyé : mardi 30 octobre 2007 19:09 À : Apache JDO project; JDO Expert Group Objet : #key and #value in query fil

Re: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, Nov 2 , 9 am PDT [NOTE: U.S. is still on daylight time]

[Sep 14 2007] AI Matthew provide examples for 8.6.1.1 jdoconfig.xml. Here are said examples. Please review; Craig, if ok, please incorporate into 2.1 spec. Sample configuration using standard Java Properties file "hr.properties" to configure a PMF with one listener for all classes: =

Re: jdo security revamped proposal

Hi Erik, While I think this is an ingenious use of Java platform security, I can't see it in the 2.1 timeframe. Even if we consider it for a later release, I am not convinced that this should be **the** way to secure PC instances. This proposal doesn't clearly address, IMHO, the case whe

Re: jdo security revamped proposal

7;t think we can have dynamic security permissions, but you can always redeploy your application. -- BlackBerry® from Mobistar--- -Original Message- From: Matthew Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:12:04 To:Erik Bengtson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc:jdo-dev@db.apach

FYI

FYI, as a quick status update, I've completed the changes discussed last week regarding bootstrapping PMFs in a serialization-friendly way for the api2 project. I'll be integrating those changes in the api2-legacy project next. -matthew

Re: JDO2.1/2.2 Proposal : Dynamic Fetch Groups

You might also consider overloaded methods on interface FetchGroup, just for completeness: // (importing java.lang.reflect.Field) FetchGroup add(Field field); FetchGroup remove(Field field); boolean hasField(Field field); // or has(Field) -- I'd consider better verb Field[] getFields(); Th

Re: Properties for PersistenceManagerFactory

.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! Matthew Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blog.matthewadams.org

Re: svn commit: r606964 - in /db/jdo/trunk: api2-legacy/test/java/javax/jdo/spi/StateInterrogationTest.java api2/test/java/javax/jdo/spi/StateInterrogationTest.java

ava.lang.reflect.Proxy; /** * This class tests the StateInterrogation interface. The test is in 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! Matthew Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blog.matthewadams.org

Re: svn commit: r606964 - in /db/jdo/trunk: api2-legacy/test/java/javax/jdo/spi/StateInterrogationTest.java api2/test/java/javax/jdo/spi/StateInterrogationTest.java

Sho'nuff, the prior version was correct. You want me to revert to the prior version or leave it alone? I'm really surprised that happened... On Dec 26, 2007, at 3:24 PM, Matthew Adams wrote: Huh? Oh, crap. It must be an artifact of my IDE! Well, we can revert, but I w

JDO 2.1 review: recursion-depth

I think it would be helpful to add the description of a recursion-depth value of zero to section 12.7.4. Values -1 and 1 are discussed, but the subsequent example uses a value of zero, which is special enough a value to be called out explicitly. -matthew

Dynamic fetch plans/groups for post-2.1 JDO?

What do you think of the following? More for discussion than a proposal just yet. Section 12.7.6 states "Fetch groups are only defined in the metadata for a class or interface." It might be convenient for users or tools to be able to dynamically modify the FetchPlan or define fetch groups, po

Re: JDO 2.1 review: recursion-depth

Yes, I remember that now. I also remember never quite understanding why 0 is an invalid value. It seems to me that 0 would result in a no-op as far as recursion goes. Why is that an error? It might be dumb, but I don't think it has to be an error. - Original Message From: Andy Jeff

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache JDO 2.1

+1 Michelle Caisse wrote: This vote is to release the Apache JDO 2.1 specification, TCK, and API (both legacy and current versions) with the projects that they depend on: enhancer, model, and util. [+1] Release JDO 2.1 specification, api, tck, enhancer, model, and util [0] Don't care [-1] Don

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache JDO 2.1

The JPA 1.0 RI was TopLink Essentials from Oracle. Sun has no JPA implementation, really. I suppose you could say that it's OpenJPA, but that's really Apache's, from BEA, which is, oh yeah, now Oracle. Harumph. Joerg von Frantzius wrote: It was Red Hat who bought JBoss, and so Hibernate. May

Re: JDO 2.2 feature list

...and the long-awaited schema synchronization API. Let's see, who's on the hook for that? Oh yeah, me. :) Erik Bengtson wrote: - The long waited enhancer API

Re: JDO FastFeather talk

What's a FastFeather talk? Craig L Russell wrote: I'd like to sign up for a FastFeather talk on JDO, but I'm only available on Wednesday afternoon (I've got to leave town on Thursday morning). Abstract: Apache JDO project, Java Data Objects has recently released JDO 2.1, an update of the JD

Domain modeling references

Hi all, I blogged after our conference call discussion instead of emailing, since I've meant to for quite some time. Here's the entry: http://blog.matthewadams.org/2008/04/good-domain-modeling.html -matthew

Re: coad chapter

It's still publicly available. If you go to my blog, http://blog.matthewadams.org and look for the "Good Domain Modeling" entry or, directly, http://blog.matthewadams.org/2008/04/good-domain-modeling.html, you will see the link after list item #1, http://www.petercoad.com/download/bookpdfs/jm

Re: [jira] Assigned: (JDO-583) Add license headers to source files.

Sorry, totally forgot about this one... Craig Russell (JIRA) wrote: [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-583?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Craig Russell reassigned JDO-583: - Assignee: Michelle Caisse (was

Re: JDO 2.2 : read-only datastore

Why not also require modifications to PCs to throw JDOUserException? Further, the exception could be a new extension of JDOUserException called JDOReadOnlyException. Andy Jefferson wrote: Something that we've been asked for several times is where a user has a datastore that is outside their co

Re: Enhancer specification text for discussion

Looks pretty good to me. One question, below, though. On Dec 21, 2008, at 3:41 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: -: If a parameter begins with a "-" is found, it is added to the other options list via the addOptions method. What is the format of the - arguments for unary and non-unary arguments?

Fetch notifications

Hi all, Sorry for the delay on this. This is pursuant to my action item: > [Feb 13 2007] AI Matthew discuss on email method by which an application > might dynamically tune itself by tracking field access by use-case? Overview Currently, the only standard means to tune JDO applications is via s

Re: Fetch notifications

inline... On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 4:33 AM, Andy Jefferson wrote: > By "tuning", are you proposing addition of non-fetchplan fields to the > selected fetch plan, or are you also proposing removal of "unused" fields > from the selected fetch plan? > I had only explicitly considered the addition of

Re: JDO and Clouds

Yes, congrats to the DataNucleus team! I hope you are handsomely rewarded for your years of hard work. On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 5:47 AM, Joerg von Frantzius wrote: > Wow! Congratulations! > > This is really great news for JDO. > > Andy Jefferson wrote: >>> There is renewed interest (e.g. cloud com

JIRA version for JDO 2.4?

Can we create a version in JIRA for 2.4? If it were there, I would have set JDO-631's version to it. -matthew

Re: JIRA version for JDO 2.4?

sion". > > It's a conscious decision to put an item into a new release, and a conscious > decision to remove it. Not all items removed from a release automatically go > into another specific release. > > Bottom line: I'm happy with the current setup but I'm willing t

Re: JDO2.3 beta ?

>> JDO-623 - patch proposed > > Matthew had a proposal to extend the cancel to be able to cancel a specific > execution of the query (as opposed to the current cancel that cancels all > running executions). In beta-2 ? > The API addition is trivial. The test cases for this are the real challenge,

Google App Engine for Java link

As promised on the Fri conference call, here is a link to the GAEJ discussion group. Home: http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine Discussions: http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine/topics Some fun discussions about persistence, since GAEJ uses DataNucleus for their persistenc

Fwd: Grails on appengine with JDO

It looks like Grails is now supporting JDO on GAEJ, and GORM is being enhanced to support JDO & JPA... -- Forwarded message -- From: Chris Beams Date: Thu, May 14, 2009 at 10:05 AM Subject: Grails on appengine with JDO To: Matthew Adams Good stuff.  Watch the screencast:

Re: Minutes: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, May 22, 9 am PDT

to be edited. > > 27.7 There are managed relationships so this paragraph needs to be edited. > > The footer for 2.3 EA still has the date May 8. > > Action Items from weeks past: > > [May 25 2007]  AI everyone download the Grails demo from grails.org  and > check it out. A

Re: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, June 12, 9 am PDT

O-619 >> 3. Other issues >> >> Action Items from weeks past: >> >> [May 25 2007] AI everyone download the Grails demo from grails.org and >> check it out. Also look at Grails/Groovy ExpandoMetaClass that has the >> magic to avoid reflection an

Re: No JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, Sep 4, 9 am PDT

Darn it. I was actually going to attend today. I'll be out of town for the next one and will have to miss it. :( On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 9:32 PM, Michelle Caisse wrote: > Hi, > > The  September 4 meeting is cancelled. We will meet again on September 11. > > -- Michelle > -- mailto:matt...@ma

Re: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, Oct 2, 9 am PDT

Won't make it this morning, no changes to report for instance callback annotations... On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 7:56 PM, Michelle Caisse wrote: > Hi, > > We will have our regular meeting Friday, October 2 at 9 am PDT to discuss > > JDO TCK issues and status. > > Dial-in numbers are: > Domestic (toll

Re: DataNucleus AccessPlatform 2.0.0 released

Sweet, Andy. Once again, great work. I really appreciate your continuing efforts to keep DataNucleus at the forefront of persistence technology. Sincerely, Matthew On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Andy Jefferson wrote: > Just for reference, AccessPlatform 2.0.0 is now released. This builds agai

Re: Spec updates for 2.3

Hi all, I have a question about the following assertion regarding getting an object by exact class with no validation. 12.6.5: If the validate flag is false, the user asserts that the instance exists and the object id represents the exact class of the persistent instance (specifically not a subc

Re: Spec updates for 2.3

already, it might be in any state at all. > > It's only the case where an instance needs to be created that the > specification should say what the state should be. > > Thanks for reading! > > Craig > > On Mar 12, 2010, at 8:43 AM, Matthew Adams wrote: > &g

Re: Spec updates for 2.3

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: > Hi Matthew, > Stop reading here. Because the next sentence begins: > A12.5.6-4 [If there is not an instance already in the cache with the same > JDO identity as the oid parameter, ... > > So that's the delimiter between "already in the cach

Re: Minutes: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, Mar 19, 11 am PDT

I think the second coming is getting close... http://www.sfjava.org/messages/boards/thread/8463961?thread=8463961 I'm hearing about more and more people interested in the NoSQL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NoSQL) movement. Interestingly, there is not a single mention of JDO or DataNucleus on th

Re: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, Mar 26, 9 am PDT

Once again, I won't be able to make this call. Perhaps, however, you could add a discussion of JDO-651 to the agenda. I'm thinking that it would be a JDO 2.4 thing at the earliest. -matthew On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 8:34 PM, Michelle Caisse wrote: > Hi, > > Please note : > - The U.S. has switche

Re: Query.executeWithMap(...) should accept unused parameters

This seems like an excellent suggestion to me. +1. 2010/4/7 Marco ???-Schulze : > Hello *, > > we're currently migrating to DataNucleus 2.1.0-m2-SNAPSHOT and hit an > exception when calling javax.jdo.Query.executeWithMap(Map params) > whenever not all parameters are used in the query. See

Re: [VOTE] Release JDO.next Specification (was Review copy of JDO 2.3 with change bars and assertions)

+1 for JDO.next +1 for JDO 3.0 On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 6:38 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: > I've looked at the changes for JDO 2.3 and I agree with others that the > changes are pretty significant in terms of new capabilities for tools and > users. > > Added an Enhancer API to allow applications to

Re: [VOTE] Release JDO.next Specification (was Review copy of JDO 2.3 with change bars and assertions)

Yes, this occurred to me last night. Are we looking at jdo3-api-3.0, or jdo2-api-3.0? On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 3:14 AM, Andy Jefferson wrote: >> To me, this justifies renaming the release from JDO 2.3 to JDO 3.0. > > One minor issue with the rename is that the Maven repo has the artifact as > "jd

Re: Restructure jdo repository

+1. If I had the time (which I obviously don't), it'd also be nice to upgrade to Maven2. If it's not done before I get the time, I'll do it... On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 6:21 AM, Craig L Russell wrote: > I'd like to simplify the jdo repository that now contains lots of projects > that are no longe

Re: Testing the JDO 3.0 release

I will. It's been a while, though. How do I get & test the 3.0 stuff? Check out from svn or other? On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Craig L Russell wrote: > Hi, > > Can we get a couple of volunteers to test the release? I've checked over > the zip and tar files and would like someone else to tr

Re: Testing the JDO 3.0 release

JDO 3.0 api jar and run your program. > > Thanks, > > Craig > > > On Jul 6, 2010, at 11:57 AM, Matthew Adams wrote: > > I will. It's been a while, though. How do I get & test the 3.0 stuff? >> Check out from svn or other? >> >> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at

Re: Please review and test JDO 3.0 staging release

Checked out trunk and built via command "maven jdo3.build" and got the following error in ./tck/target/logs/20100706-122110/derby-dsid-lifecycle-junit.txt: RUN HollowInstanceMaintainsPK.test RUN MultiplePMsReturnInstancesRepresentingSamePC.test RUN NontransactionalWriteThrows.testNontransactionalW

Re: Please review and test JDO 3.0 staging release

uot;maven jdo3.build". All tests > passed. > > -- Michelle > > > On 07/06/2010 03:10 PM, Matthew Adams wrote: > >> Checked out trunk and built via command "maven jdo3.build" and got the >> following error in >> ./tck/target/logs

Re: [VOTE] JDO 3.0 release

+1 On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Craig L Russell wrote: > We have prepared the release artifacts for JDO 3.0 and staged them on > http://people.apache.org/~clr/dist/db/jdo/3.0/ > > This is the culmination of the efforts of the JDO expert group

Re: Fetch configuration

Seems like a good idea. Could foreign keys be considered the same as basic fields for the purposes of the default fetch group? That is, fetched by default unless the user says don't fetch? I assume that if an object is loaded using a fetch group that doesn't include foreign keys and the foreign

Re: Fetch configuration

On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: > > On Jul 14, 2010, at 7:53 AM, Matthew Adams wrote: > > Seems like a good idea. Could foreign keys be considered the same as basic >> fields for the purposes of the default fetch group? That is, fetched by >>

ant optional?

Hi guys, I was just looking at the pom in trunk/api and noticed that on line 133, the Ant dependency is declared optional. This is actually not true, as some of the code in the test project can't compile without it. I propose removing the line. Cool? -matthew -- mailto:matt...@matthewadams.

Re: ant optional?

It already is. The scope is orthogonal to whether it's optional. -matthew On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: > > On Dec 8, 2010, at 9:22 AM, Matthew Adams wrote: > > Hi guys, >> >> I was just looking at the pom in trunk/api and noticed th

Re: ant optional?

Maven's test scope only means that it needs to be on the test classpath. It would not introduce a runtime or even compile time dependency of jdo-api.jar. Optional means that if Maven can't find it, compilation should still succeed, which it wouldn't if it weren't available. Again, and are

Re: ant optional?

patch for one of us to commit. > > Craig > > On Dec 9, 2010, at 6:33 AM, Matthew Adams wrote: > >> Maven's test scope only means that it needs to be on the test classpath. It >> would not introduce a runtime or even compile time dependency of >> j

FYI: JPA 2.1 EG

Linda approved my membership to JPA 2.1. Anyone else planning to? The more, the merrier, I say. Apply to join at http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=338 -- look for the text "I would like to join this Expert Group", just below the list of experts. The current list can be found there, too. -matthew

Re: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, Mar 18, 9 am Pacific Time

Sorry, can't make it today... On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:41 PM, wrote: > >  Hi, > >  We will have our regular meeting Friday, March 18, at 9 am Pacific Time >  to discuss JDO TCK issues and status. > >  Dial-in numbers are: >  US Toll free: 866 682-4770 >  Germany Frankfurt 06916106 >  Germa

Re: Asynchronous database ops in JDO - something for the future?

Hi David, Interesting ideas. If you can, please file a JIRA so that we can track it. It would probably be related to issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-651 . -matthew On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 7:14 PM, David Bullock wrote: > Hi JDO specification folk, > > One environment where I'd

Re: JDO Logging Severe message

This is better asked on the Google AppEngine for Java forum, but since it's a JDOCanRetryException, I imagine it's not too bad. Remember that Google maintains the DataNucleus plugin that enables them to offer JDO support. -matthew On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 10:35 AM, li8ras wrote: > I am doing a J

Re: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, Aug 26, 9 am Pacific Time

I'd like to join. My skype id is matthewadams12. On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Michelle Caisse wrote: > Hi, > > We will have our regular meeting Friday, August 26 at 9 am Pacific Time > to discuss JDO TCK issues and status. > > The telecon will be held on Skype this week. Send your user id

Re: CANCELLED: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, Sep 02, 9 am Pacific Time

Gosh darn doo-hickey heck. I was hoping to discuss JDO-684 & JDO-685. I suppose conversing in JIRA is good enough. What do you all think about a quick push of JDO 3.0.1 out the door for the corrected OSGi Export-Package headers? -matthew On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:24 PM, Michelle Caisse wrote:

Re: CANCELLED: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, Sep 02, 9 am Pacific Time

Sure, although I have no idea how to do that. Can you RMTFM? On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Craig L Russell wrote: > Hi Matthew, > > > On Sep 1, 2011, at 9:29 PM, Matthew Adams wrote: > > Gosh darn doo-hickey heck. I was hoping to discuss JDO-684 & JDO-685. I >>

Re: [jira] [Commented] (JDO-684) Fix OSGi Export-Package entries in JDO 3.0 manifest to include version

Sir, yes sir. I will take said steps & correct or report back any errors. On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: > Hi Matthew, > > I'd like to see you take on the role of release manager for your proposed > 3.0.1 release. > > The process is documented at > http://svn.apache.org/

Re: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, Sep 10, 9 am Pacific Time

Is there no meeting today? I'm on the call and I'm just hearing some really awesome music... On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 11:17 PM, Michelle Caisse wrote: > Hi, > > We will have our regular meeting Friday, September 10 at 9 am Pacific Time > to discuss JDO TCK issues and status. > > Dial-in number

Re: Maven bundle plugin pom excerpt

Version 1.4.0? That's pretty old. We're using 2.3.5: org.apache.felix maven-bundle-plugin 2.3.5 true ... On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Craig L Russell wrote: >       >        org.apa

Big patch

Hi all, Attached is a patch to trunk for JDO-693 & JDO-688. It also fixes the failing tests in PMFMapMapTest. I refactored the JDOConfigTestClassLoader to be simpler. Don't remember what I was thinking way back when I wrote it, but it's way simpler now. I'd thought about creating a roll-up tas

Re: Big patch

Done. See JDO-695. On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: > Hi Matthew, > > I'm afraid only the subscribers to jdo-experts got the attachment. > > Can you please attach it to one of the JIRA issues? > > Thanks, > > Craig > > On Sep 27,

Unrecognized javax.jdo options: throw?

Hi all, As I was entering issues like JDO-693, I wondered whether implementations should throw if any unrecognized standard configuration options that start with "javax.jdo." WDYT? -matthew -- @matthewadams12 mailto:matt...@matthewadams.me skype:matthewadams12 yahoo:matthewadams aol:matthewada

Re: Unrecognized javax.jdo options: throw?

Cool. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-696 On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: > > On Sep 29, 2011, at 8:30 AM, Matthew Adams wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> As I was entering issues like JDO-693, I wondered whether >> implementations

FYI: requested Gemini.JDO as a peer project to Gemini.JPA

FYI, https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=359728 Thought you all would like to know. -matthew -- @matthewadams12 mailto:matt...@matthewadams.me skype:matthewadams12 yahoo:matthewadams aol:matthewadams12 google-talk:matthewadam...@gmail.com msn:matt...@matthewadams.me http://matthewadam

Re: FYI: requested Gemini.JDO as a peer project to Gemini.JPA

You can always subscribe to the issue... On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: > I'm keen to hear of the status of this request as it moves through the > system. > > Craig > > On Oct 3, 2011, at 8:49 AM, Matthew Adams wrote: > >> FYI, >

  1   2   >