Chris Colman wrote:
The obvious benefit in such an approach is that your POJO model and the
services that you provide to implement business rules etc., remain
completely portable to different persistence engines - ie., no vendor
lock in.
well, i thought that was JPA was all about !?
No, definitely not! JPA was all about creating a standard that Hibernate could conform
to. Remember there *already* was a standard for Java persistence: JDO. JDO
implementations such as JPOX and others implement both JDO (obviously) and JPA but it is
not possible for Hibernate to provide all the features of JDO and so it could never
implement the JDO standard - hence a less powerful standard had to be created so that
Hibernate could play the "standards" game.
It seems it's also possible for a few other ORM tools to conform to that
standard. Apart from Hibernate and JPOX you've got TopLink, Cayenne and
others.
Which would you rather depend on; exPOJO or JPA?
/Anders
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
