Hi Eric, Am Freitag, den 25.06.2010, 05:16 +0200 schrieb Eric Charles: > Hi Tim, > > If we set streaming by default, we can not use derby anymore as default. well, shipping derby is obviously nice for a quick James test, we should leave that as it is. Maybe we can find a better way to configure streaming, the store, the provider. Would be really nice to just have one simple config file and not mess in the spring.xml and persistence.xml - just a side note.
> With a different provider, schema may be different. > Do you mean we should ensure with specific annotations that schema will > always be the same? Yes, something like that. The OpenJPA annotations won't work for others and hence they will again produce (or try to use) linker tables. Why would anybody want to use a different provider, by the way? Being generic is cool, but it's not that a user would benefit from that. I think it's more on the programmer's side that we could prefer another provider sometime and in that unlikely case we could easily adapt the current implementation. I'd suggest being content with OpenJPA and not offer any other provider. That saves us a lot of headache. Regards Tim --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscr...@james.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-h...@james.apache.org
