users@jpa-spec.java.net

[jpa-spec users] Re: Feedback on the JPA 2.2 MR process...

From: Lukas Jungmann <lukas.jungmann_at_oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 17:03:55 +0100

Hi,

comments inline...

On 12/16/15 4:51 PM, arjan tijms wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Paul Benedict <pbenedict_at_apache.org
> <mailto:pbenedict_at_apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Will not the JPA 2.2. process comb the backlog to see what other
> good issues can be included? I watched the presentation too and
> know EclipseLink has many supposed 2.2 features already
> prototyped; I just wasn't expecting it to be the end-all of the
> entire feature set.
>
>
> I can't speak for the MR/spec lead, but I interpreted the given list
> as just an initial list of issues that seem likely. For clarity this
> list is:
>
> * CDI support in attribute converters
> * Meta annotations
> * Repeating annotations

this is already prototyped in RI and is currently being formalized for
the spec itself. I'm hoping to send out the wording for the review by
the group by mid-January.

>
> * Date/time support
> * Stream support in queries
> * JPQL/SQL string from Query
>
> * Autocloseable for entity manager/factory (for Java SE)
> * Pagination support for JPQL and Criteria
> * Creating criteria from query
> * Subquery(entityType) to criteria
> * Query metamodel by entity name
> * NoSQL
> * Multitenacy
>
> The "problem" is of course that it's a MR, not a full spec revision
> with a selected EG etc. And a MR has a limited scope and doesn't have
> an official EG etc. I'd rather seen an official full release given the
> amount of issues that are still open for JPA and the fact that JPA is
> arguably one of the most important specs in Java EE (I'd personally
> say it's only second to CDI).

one more item which is missing in the list and which would be good to
tackle is improving integration between JPA and CDI based on issues
filed in the tracker, at least those doable within the scope of an MR.

thanks,
--lukas
>
> Yet, a MR is better than nothing.
>
> Kind regards,
> Arjan Tijms
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Scott Marlow <smarlow_at_redhat.com
> <mailto:smarlow_at_redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have some feedback that I would like to share about the JPA
> 2.2 process (see users_at_javaee-spec.java.net
> <mailto:users_at_javaee-spec.java.net> email [1]). While, I
> enjoyed listening to Lukas Jungmann's presentation [2], I am
> disappointed to not yet be able to participate in the
> discussion of what changes should be in JPA 2.2. I think it
> is very important that we follow the JCP 2.9 1.1.1 [3]
> guidance. I think that the easiest way to ensure that the
> substantial development of the JPA 2.2 MR specification is
> observable, is to immediately start a
> jsrNNN-experts_at_jpa-spec.java.net
> <mailto:jsrNNN-experts_at_jpa-spec.java.net> mailing list.
>
> I also would like to congratulate Lukas Jungmann, on being the
> new JPA specification lead! :-)
>
> Regards,
> Scott
>
> [1]
> https://java.net/projects/javaee-spec/lists/users/archive/2015-11/message/1
>
> [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OKEpg5zpsU#t=4h19m26s
>
> [3] Section 1.1.1 from https://www.jcp.org/en/procedures/jcp2_9:
>
> "PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
> Expert Groups may choose to keep purely administrative matters
> private, but all substantive business must be performed in a
> manner that allows the public to observe their work and to
> respond to it. All proceedings, discussions, and working
> documents must be published, and a mechanism must be
> established to allow the public to provide feedback. One
> common way of meeting these requirements is through the use of
> mailing lists, but other alternatives such as blogs, Wikis,
> and discussion forums may be preferred. Whatever communication
> mechanisms are chosen, these must include an archiving
> function so that a record of all communications is preserved.
> Archives must be readable by the public. 3
> "
>
>
>