hi @ all, we need an agreement about the module name (and if multiple modules are needed). it would be useful to do it before v0.3 (which should get released asap).
regards, gerhard 2012/7/10 Arne Limburg <[email protected]> > Hi Romain, > > Nothing for the 0.3 release. But we discussed some EntityManager > configuration options that we may add later. > So for 0.3 I am fine with tx-api and jpa-impl > > Cheers, > Arne > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]] > Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. Juli 2012 09:06 > An: [email protected] > Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > @Transactional > > What will you put in jpa api today? > Le 10 juil. 2012 08:43, "Arne Limburg" <[email protected]> a > écrit : > > > I think at least we will end up with a jpa-api And the tx-impl maybe > > will contain the JTA stuff? > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: Mark Struberg [mailto:[email protected]] > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. Juli 2012 08:39 > > An: [email protected] > > Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > > @Transactional > > > > > for renaming PersistenceStrategy to TransactionStrategy > > > > +1 > > > > > > > +1 for renaming deltaspike-jpa-module-api to > > > +deltaspike-tx-module-api and > > > creating empty deltaspike-jpa-module-api and > > > deltaspike-tx-module-impl > > > > Not sure, think we need to think a bit harder about what we will > > finally end up with. > > Will we have a api which has any EE dependency finally? If not it > > might be enough to have tx-api + jpa-impl + jta-impl > > > > LieGrue, > > strub > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Arne Limburg <[email protected]> > > > To: "[email protected]" > > > <[email protected]> > > > Cc: > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 8:36 AM > > > Subject: AW: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > > > @Transactional > > > > > > What do the others think about doing this already in 0.3? > > > +1 from me for renaming PersistenceStrategy to TransactionStrategy > > > +1 for renaming deltaspike-jpa-module-api to > > > +deltaspike-tx-module-api and > > > creating empty deltaspike-jpa-module-api and > > > deltaspike-tx-module-impl > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Arne > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]] > > > Gesendet: Montag, 9. Juli 2012 21:33 > > > An: [email protected] > > > Betreff: Re: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > > > @Transactional > > > > > > +1 for the last > > > > > > - Romain > > > > > > > > > 2012/7/9 Arne Limburg <[email protected]> > > > > > >> Ihmo we should rename the api to deltaspike-tx-module-api and > > >> rename the PersistenceStrategy to TransactionStrategy Also it looks > > >> strange, the name of the impl should be left as it is. Maybe we > > >> should add an empty impl to the tx-module and an empty api to the JPA > module? > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Arne > > >> > > >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > >> Von: Jason Porter [mailto:[email protected]] > > >> Gesendet: Montag, 9. Juli 2012 18:54 > > >> An: [email protected] > > >> Betreff: Re: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > > >> @Transactional > > >> > > >> 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 > > >> > > > > > >
