I'm fine renaming things for v0.3 as we really haven't done any JPA related stuff yet.
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Gerhard Petracek < [email protected]> wrote: > @ mark: > that's more or less what we discussed at [1]. > > regards, > gerhard > > [1] http://s.apache.org/3pO > > > > 2012/7/9 Arne Limburg <[email protected]> > > > For api it's fine, > > and then we have two impl modules, JPA and JTA? > > > > Cheers, > > Arne > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]] > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 8. Juli 2012 21:37 > > An: [email protected]; Mark Struberg > > Betreff: Re: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > > @Transactional > > > > sounds fine > > > > - Romain > > > > > > 2012/7/8 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > > > > > maybe we should just rename the jpa module to tx? > > > > > > There is no single import of any javax.persistence in > > > deltaspike-jpa-api yet. > > > > > > LieGrue, > > > strub > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: Arne Limburg <[email protected]> > > > > To: "[email protected]" < > > > [email protected]> > > > > Cc: > > > > Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 8:39 PM > > > > Subject: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > > > @Transactional > > > > > > > > Yes, sounds good. > > > > The impl of that module could contain the JTA stuff. And the JPA > > > > module > > > would > > > > contain the resource local stuff. Everybody that does not need the > > > > JTA > > > then > > > > could just use the tx-api and the JPA api and impl. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Arne > > > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 8. Juli 2012 20:29 > > > > An: [email protected] > > > > Betreff: Re: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > > > @Transactional > > > > > > > > i thought the same, JTA shouldn't depend on JPA. @Transactional > > > > should > > > be in > > > > a tx module then JPA could use it. > > > > > > > > wdyt? > > > > > > > > - Romain > > > > > > > > > > > > 2012/7/8 Arne Limburg <[email protected]> > > > > > > > >> OK, but I am still not sure where to split it. While implementing > > > >> this, I got the feeling, that the @Transactional stuff should > > > >> completely move out of the JPA module. It feeled quite strange that > > > >> the JTA module depends on the JPA module... > > > >> > > > >> I think, I'll push my stuff right after the 0.3 release and than > > > >> we can discuss this at the code-base. > > > >> Maybe I should put all into the JPA module and we split it after > > > >> agreeing to a module structure? > > > >> > > > >> Cheers, > > > >> Arne > > > >> > > > >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > > >> Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]] > > > >> Gesendet: Sonntag, 8. Juli 2012 17:48 > > > >> An: [email protected]; Mark Struberg > > > >> Betreff: Re: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > > > >> @Transactional > > > >> > > > >> +1 > > > >> > > > >> - Romain > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> 2012/7/8 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > > > >> > > > >> > +1 for JTA module. > > > >> > > > > >> > LieGrue, > > > >> > strub > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > > > >> > > From: Arne Limburg <[email protected]> > > To: > > > >> "[email protected]" < > > > > >> [email protected]> > > > >> > > Cc: > > > >> > > Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 5:47 PM > > Subject: AW: [DISCUSS] > > > >> [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > > @Transactional > > > > Hi, > > > >> > > I startet implementing it that way, but I stumbled over another > > > > issue: > > > >> > > We get a dependency to the JTA spec and the EJB spec that way. > > > >> So > > > > > > > >> > > our > > > >> > JPA module > > > >> > > only would work with this apis in the classpath. > > > >> > > Do we accept this or are we back on a JTA module? > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Cheers, > > > >> > > Arne > > > >> > > > > > >> > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau > > > >> [mailto:[email protected]] > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. Juli > > > >> 2012 15:07 > > An: [email protected] > > > >> > > Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > > > > > >> @Transactional > > > > if it works fine with CMT +1 > > > > > > > >> well let's have a try, we'll fix it if it is not enough > > > > ;) > > > >> > > > > > >> > > - Romain > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > 2012/7/5 Pete Muir <[email protected]> > > > >> In Seam 2 > > > >> we: > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> * checked if UT was available in JNDI, and used it if it > > > > were > > > >> > >> * checked if there was a CMT transaction, and used it (IIRC > > > > this > > > >> > >> wwas to work around abug) > > > >> > >> * otherwise tried to use a resource local transaction (e.g. > > > > from > > > >> > >> Hibernate) > > > >> > >> * allowed the user to override and specify one strategy > > > > >> >> > >> In Seam 3 we did the same. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> So I like option 1. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> On 5 Jul 2012, at 10:03, Arne Limburg wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > Hi, > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > yesterday I startet working on the JTA support for > > > > @Transactional. > > > >> > >> > My current approach is to implement a > > > > JtaPersistenceStrategy. > > > >> > >> > However that leads me to the problem: Who decides which > > > > > > > >> > >> PersistenceStrategy should be taken and how should this > > > > decision > > > >> > >> be > > > >> > made? > > > >> > >> > I have three suggestions: > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > 1. We detect, if a UserTransaction is available, > > > > if so, the > > > >> > >> JtaPersistenceStrategy is taken, otherwise the > >> > > > >> ResourceLocalPersistenceStrategy is taken. > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > 2. We detect, if the involved persistence units > > > > use JTA or > > > >> > >> RESOURCE_LOCAL (which would lead to another question: Would > > > > we > > > >> > >> like to support, that @Transactional mixes both strategies?) > > > > and > > > >> > >> decide from that information > > > > >> > >> > 3. We let the user decide by making one (or both) > > > > persistence > > > >> > >> strategies @Alternatives > > > >> > >> > What do you think? > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > Cheers, > > > >> > >> > Arne > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > -- Jason Porter http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com http://twitter.com/lightguardjp Software Engineer Open Source Advocate Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling PGP key id: 926CCFF5 PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
