Le 2012-07-17 à 05:57, Paul Lynch a écrit :
>
> On 12 Jul 2012, at 02:14, Daniel Beatty wrote:
>
>> On a side note, do we have cheat sheets or a curriculum from the boot camp
>> before WOWODC 2012? As a professor type, I would really love to borrow the
>> instructors material to help my own
On 12 Jul 2012, at 02:14, Daniel Beatty wrote:
> On a side note, do we have cheat sheets or a curriculum from the boot camp
> before WOWODC 2012? As a professor type, I would really love to borrow the
> instructors material to help my own students, as I get them. Even if I am
> only tutori
They just have what the java world has; which is JAX-RS and it's
implementations like Jersey+Jackson and RestEasy. It's good I think, but
completely generic, so something that is specific designed to handle entity
objects is helpful. So yes ERRest could be useful. Or recreating
something like it
Am 13.07.2012 um 23:57 schrieb John Huss:
> So this thread has devolved quite a bit from it's original intent. One of my
> original goals was to detail the areas where people could help with an effort
> to provide an easy and painless migration to Cayenne. I haven't seen much
> interest in h
Maybe start by asking "Does Cayenne already have anything like ERRest?" If
not, they might be glad of getting it.
On 2012-07-13, at 4:20 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
> Do you think having a version of ERRest on top of Cayenne would make sense?
> Since ERRest make a lot of EOF calls, it might be a
Le 2012-07-13 à 18:10, Daniel Beatty a écrit :
> Greetings all,
> I have to agree with Mike. There is a lot of good to be had in the Cayenne
> project, and the discuss there of. For starters, it identifies the need in
> our community for the stability of a good ORM that is well defined and
>
Do you think having a version of ERRest on top of Cayenne would make sense?
Since ERRest make a lot of EOF calls, it might be a good example of trying to
move something to Cayenne and to see what's missing.
> So this thread has devolved quite a bit from it's original intent. One of my
> origin
Greetings Ramsey,
You have highlighted why this makes it the compiler guy's dream job. Take a
decent size nightmare for the the subject, pile on a deadline, and add on
mediocre salary to give us either a government rice bowl and genius grinder.
Oops. Sorry, those have been my dreams lately.
Greetings all,
I have to agree with Mike. There is a lot of good to be had in the Cayenne
project, and the discuss there of. For starters, it identifies the need in our
community for the stability of a good ORM that is well defined and stable,
connected to a good web object generating framewor
So this thread has devolved quite a bit from it's original intent. One of
my original goals was to detail the areas where people could help with an
effort to provide an easy and painless migration to Cayenne. I haven't
seen much interest in helping thus far. So if you are interested, please
spea
On Jul 13, 2012, at 7:48 PM, Ramsey Gurley wrote:
>
> You can do go client, but then you have to build a client for every platform
> you support. That's not trivial.
>
> Deploying to client platforms is quite a bit different from deploying to a
> server under your control too. Instead of hav
Hi Farrukh,
Thanks for the summary!
Chuck
On 2012-07-13, at 5:06 AM, Farrukh Ijaz wrote:
> Sorry for late response, just landed last night.
>
> The idea is very simple to understand and implement. E.g. I've a third party
> library which has a method named with following signature:
>
> Stri
On 2012-07-13, at 2:54 AM, Henrique Gomes wrote:
>
> On Jul 12, 2012, at 8:06 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
>
>>>
>>> You want to know the biggest unfixable problem with WO for me? WO apps
>>> can't be deployed on any mobile platform. That really sucks.
>>
>> For that, you need to change the paradi
On Jul 13, 2012, at 2:54 AM, Henrique Gomes wrote:
>
> On Jul 12, 2012, at 8:06 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
>
>>>
>>> You want to know the biggest unfixable problem with WO for me? WO apps
>>> can't be deployed on any mobile platform. That really sucks.
>>
>> For that, you need to change the para
don't make decisions based on anecdotal evidence
ms
On Jul 13, 2012, at 9:03 AM, Karl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Making EOF multi-threaded is really not that desirable nor is it necessary.
> EOF gets most of its speed and efficiency through its 'cut through'
> single-threaded design at the Access lay
>> Yes, the JPA is a spec, I just think it is a bad spec :). The Criteria API
>> alone made me want to grab my head by the eyesockets and remove it from my
>> torso.
>
> That's pretty big statement, I might have agreed with you if I wasn't aware
> of what's JPA is all about. Here is the specifi
> Yes, the JPA is a spec, I just think it is a bad spec :). The Criteria API
> alone made me want to grab my head by the eyesockets and remove it from my
> torso.
That's pretty big statement, I might have agreed with you if I wasn't aware of
what's JPA is all about. Here is the specification de
It remains so mystifying to me how the Java community produces such absolute
garbage as JPA and their other specs. How many versions of EJB have we been
through? 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 2.x, 3.xand how consistent are they (hint: not
one bit).
I'll happily, boringly stick with EOF which seems to
Hi,
Making EOF multi-threaded is really not that desirable nor is it necessary.
EOF gets most of its speed and efficiency through its 'cut through'
single-threaded design at the Access layer.
About 4 years ago, Apple tested an internal build of WO/EOF that was fully
multi-threaded. It was ab
>> But yes, I've used Cayenne on a couple of projects. As you know it feels a
>> *lot* like EOF and was by far the nicest ORM I could legally use at my
>> previous pure java workplace. (protip: never go anywhere near JPA, it *will*
>> rape your dog and kill your grandmother.) Apart from the tech
Sorry for late response, just landed last night.
The idea is very simple to understand and implement. E.g. I've a third party
library which has a method named with following signature:
String encode(String someString) {
// some crappy encoding performed on someString and saved as encoded
Just a fix, I mean JPA is not a product but a specification :)
Farrukh
On 2012-07-13, at 3:41 PM, Farrukh Ijaz
wrote:
>
> On 2012-07-12, at 2:01 PM, Hugi Thordarson wrote:
>
I think Hugi also use it.
>>>
>>> Is that a point for or against it? :-P
>>
>>
>>
>> But yes, I've used Cay
On 2012-07-12, at 6:32 PM, arosenzw...@clinworx.com wrote:
> Hi WOrriors,
>
> I still question why we are fighting so hard for Object-relational mapping.
> If we are contemplating doing work, shouldn't we consider going straight for
> object databases? Take out the transcription layer. Let's
On 2012-07-12, at 2:01 PM, Hugi Thordarson wrote:
>>> I think Hugi also use it.
>>
>> Is that a point for or against it? :-P
>
>
>
> But yes, I've used Cayenne on a couple of projects. As you know it feels a
> *lot* like EOF and was by far the nicest ORM I could legally use at my
> previo
Weaving is different than Dynamic join point interception.
Farrukh
On 2012-07-11, at 10:40 PM, John Huss wrote:
> My understanding is that AOP requires "weaving" or rewriting of the bytecode.
> If so, this is not allowed by the license - it prohibits modification. But
> people may not care
Sorry for late response, just landed last night.
The idea is very simple to understand and implement. E.g. I've a third party
library which has a method named with following signature:
String encode(String someString) {
// some crappy encoding performed on someString and saved as encoded
I think Hugi also use it.
>>>
>>> Is that a point for or against it? :-P
>>
>>
>
> Ah ha! So you ARE still reading the list! :-) Good to see you around!
Haha, thanks :). Oddly enough, I always read the lists religiously, even when I
wasn't using WO that much.
- hugi
___
I believe the takeaway here is that Cayenne is indeed under active development,
which is nice :).
- hugi
On 12.7.2012, at 17:07, John Huss wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Hugi Thordarson wrote:
> >> Cayenne is still missing a lot of functionality when compared to
> >> EOF/Wonder an
On Jul 12, 2012, at 8:06 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
>>
>> You want to know the biggest unfixable problem with WO for me? WO apps can't
>> be deployed on any mobile platform. That really sucks.
>
> For that, you need to change the paradigm from interface vending servers to
> servers that vend data
Like it
On 2012/07/11, at 20:12, Farrukh Ijaz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In past I've used AOP to address issues of closed source. This I believe if
> carefully used can help convert the EOF from single to multi threaded and/or
> solve other bottleneck problems. Having said this doesn't mean I'm against
Grumble. I hate it when Karl is right.
Chunk and needing a diet
On 2012-07-12, at 11:36 AM, Karl wrote:
> Its Chunk, not Chuck now. Please start signing appropriately.
>
> Karl
>
> On 2012-07-12, at 9:28 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
>
>>
>> On 2012-07-12, at 4:01 AM, Hugi Thordarson wrote:
>>
Hi John & Hugi;
True, this is the biggest gap I've come across - I have an app that does
exactly that. However, there are a few built-in alternatives, namely
SQLTemplate and EJBQLQuery. But if you have a lot of this in your app,
you'll probably want to wait to consider migrating.
In my use of
On 2012-07-12, at 11:51 AM, Ramsey Gurley wrote:
> On Jul 12, 2012, at 9:11 AM, Alexander Spohr wrote:
>
>> We want to go the WO-way and are asking us how we can make that way bring us
>> into the future.
>>
>> You propose to switch to a different lane and have us all run into another
>> direc
On Jul 12, 2012, at 9:11 AM, Alexander Spohr wrote:
> We want to go the WO-way and are asking us how we can make that way bring us
> into the future.
>
> You propose to switch to a different lane and have us all run into another
> direction.
In the context of this discussion, I think Aaron's
Its Chunk, not Chuck now. Please start signing appropriately.
Karl
On 2012-07-12, at 9:28 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
>
> On 2012-07-12, at 4:01 AM, Hugi Thordarson wrote:
>
I think Hugi also use it.
>>>
>>> Is that a point for or against it? :-P
>>
>>
>
> Ah ha! So you ARE still readin
On 2012-07-12, at 4:01 AM, Hugi Thordarson wrote:
>>> I think Hugi also use it.
>>
>> Is that a point for or against it? :-P
>
>
Ah ha! So you ARE still reading the list! :-) Good to see you around!
> But yes, I've used Cayenne on a couple of projects. As you know it feels a
> *lot* li
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Hugi Thordarson wrote:
> >> Cayenne is still missing a lot of functionality when compared to
> EOF/Wonder and generally feels less mature (understandably, since EOF is
> ancient). This is perhaps not such a huge problem, since functionality can
> always be added—b
We want to go the WO-way and are asking us how we can make that way bring us
into the future.
You propose to switch to a different lane and have us all run into another
direction. That is a totally different discussion. We don’t want to change our
way of programming, we just want the core to be
Aaron
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:22:53 -0700
From: Chuck Hill
To: Michael Kondratov
Cc: WebObjects-Dev List
Subject: Re: Migrating from EOF to Cayenne
Message-ID: <0e2dca05-61df-4de8-a468-79e0d2846...@global-village.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Apparently
I apologize if this has already been suggested or discussed elsewhere, but it
might be a worthwhile exercise to extend the API and feature comparison on the
WIKI (http://wiki.wocommunity.org/display/WO/Alternative+Technologies-Cayenne
... thanks John) in the direction of a roadmap between where
>> Cayenne is still missing a lot of functionality when compared to EOF/Wonder
>> and generally feels less mature (understandably, since EOF is ancient). This
>> is perhaps not such a huge problem, since functionality can always be
>> added—but there is indeed a *lot* of work to be done to reach
Hi;
I can't speak for WO integration but from the perspective of using
Cayenne with other infrastructure, I can say that I enjoyed working with
Cayenne a while back -- I'm sadly not using it at the moment.
Coming from an integrated stack like WO, it is possible to forget that
Cayenne is focu
I ment if anyone used an Objective C port of WO.
Michael
On Jul 11, 2012, at 9:02 PM, prob...@macti.ca wrote:
> I think Hugi also use it.
>
> Envoyé de mon iPhone
>
> Le 2012-07-11 à 20:24, "Chuck Hill" a écrit :
>
>> Apparently
>>
>> http://cayenne.apache.org/success-stories.html
>>
>>
>
Greetings ladies and gentlemen,
Well, Chuck made some some good points. So did Paul. In the end, it comes
down what is the smart investment for us as a community?
On a side note, do we have cheat sheets or a curriculum from the boot camp
before WOWODC 2012? As a professor type, I would re
On 2012-07-11, at 6:02 PM, prob...@macti.ca wrote:
> I think Hugi also use it.
Is that a point for or against it? :-P
>
> Envoyé de mon iPhone
>
> Le 2012-07-11 à 20:24, "Chuck Hill" a écrit :
>
>> Apparently
>>
>> http://cayenne.apache.org/success-stories.html
>>
>>
>> On 2012-07-11,
I think Hugi also use it.
Envoyé de mon iPhone
Le 2012-07-11 à 20:24, "Chuck Hill" a écrit :
> Apparently
>
> http://cayenne.apache.org/success-stories.html
>
>
> On 2012-07-11, at 5:21 PM, Michael Kondratov wrote:
>
>> Anyone used it? Does it actually work?
>>
>> Michael
>>
>> Sent from
Apparently
http://cayenne.apache.org/success-stories.html
On 2012-07-11, at 5:21 PM, Michael Kondratov wrote:
> Anyone used it? Does it actually work?
>
> Michael
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 11, 2012, at 19:10, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Am 11.07.2012 um 23:03 schrie
Anyone used it? Does it actually work?
Michael
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 11, 2012, at 19:10, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf
wrote:
>
> Am 11.07.2012 um 23:03 schrieb Daniel Beatty:
>
>> Greetings Ladies and Gentlemen,
>> I tend to agree with Chuck on the notion that this could be a costly
>> mar
Am 11.07.2012 um 23:03 schrieb Daniel Beatty:
> Greetings Ladies and Gentlemen,
> I tend to agree with Chuck on the notion that this could be a costly marriage
> without some kind of stability assurance. My recommendation would be to have
> Cayenne be standardized so that at least there is bot
> > While other languages are dead, Smalltalk is a living language that refuses
> > to die. It is uber productive. It's the xombi of the object oriented
> > languages.
> >
> > I wonder if our collective talents and efforts might be better aimed at
> &g
ted languages.
>
> I wonder if our collective talents and efforts might be better aimed at some
> cheesier cheese. Seaside could make for a better way to WO.
>
> -- Aaron
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:35:48 -0700
> From: Chuck Hill
> To: Theodore Petrosky
productive. It's the xombi of the object
oriented languages.
I wonder if our collective talents and efforts might be better aimed at
some cheesier cheese. Seaside could make for a better way to WO.
-- Aaron
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:35:48 -0700
From: Chuck Hill
To: Theodore
On Jul 11, 2012, at 12:40 PM, John Huss wrote:
> Decompiling whole classes to fix bugs has been done before. It makes me
> quesy though.
The latest version of JD-GUI is pretty good. Only a few errors to clean up
after decompiling.
___
Do not post a
My understanding is that AOP requires "weaving" or rewriting of the
bytecode. If so, this is not allowed by the license - it prohibits
modification. But people may not care about that. Decompiling whole
classes to fix bugs has been done before. It makes me quesy though.
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at
Hi Farrukh,
I like the idea of using AOP to address bugs in WO. Can you give us any
details on how you did that?
As for making EOF multi-threaded that is a very fundamental part of the
design. Fixing that with AOP would be challenging. :-)
Chuck
On 2012-07-11, at 11:12 AM, Farrukh I
Hi,
In past I've used AOP to address issues of closed source. This I believe if
carefully used can help convert the EOF from single to multi threaded and/or
solve other bottleneck problems. Having said this doesn't mean I'm against
Cayane. However if the current EOF issues get fixed with AOP pa
I agree that we need to more closely examine Cayenne before jumping in with
both feet. How mature are the tools? What is the functionality gap? How
important is the missing functionality? How costly is adding any needed
functionality? Will the missing functionality fit in with the Cayenne
Hurray someone actually started talking about this.
I want to add my two cents without starting a "this is better than that"
conversation.
If Cayenne is to be utilized, someone in the know must look not only at the
current state of Cayenne, but at the developers. What is/was their philosophy
John,
I think you should consider if you might be able to do a WOWODC-2013
presentation on ERCayenne.
-Kieran
On Jul 11, 2012, at 11:09 AM, John Huss wrote:
> At WOWODC there was a lot of interest in migrating from EOF to Cayenne, and
> even entirely rebasing Wonder to run on top of Cayenne i
59 matches
Mail list logo
