| Craig Russell (JIRA) 2007-06-26, 7:11 pm |
|
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/brow...action_12508304 ]
Craig Russell commented on JDO-403:
-----------------------------------
> If the issue here is to justify having columns (plural) in @Field (for use by embedded fields) then the example of using an embedded PC with a 1-1 relation to another PC which uses a compound PK is ample justification IMHO (never mind the fact that this
is how we would have done it in XML via <embedded> ).
I agree that having columns (plural) in @Field is not an issue.
> If the issue is how we should map non-standard types like java.awt.Point then that really needs its own JIRA since it affects not just annotations but also XML, and not just embedded fields but also any field of that type in a class (going back to my "M
yLine" class earlier in the JIRA - how to specify the persistence of that on its own never mind embedded). [A java.awt.Point is not PC and so can't have @Field (or <field> ) defining for it without a change to the spec. If we are contemplating doing such a
thing then that would have some useful applications in JPOX spatial types persistence support]
I think there are two different topics here.
1. I agree that if we're discussing how to map types that are not mentioned in the spec and not able to be enhanced (java.awt.Point) this is a separate issue and we should take it off to another JIRA.
2. I'd like to talk about mapping org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.mylib.PCRect as an embedded field. PCRect includes two PCPoint instances, so you have to map the embedded PCPoint instances as embedded-embedded. I'll take a look at whether the existing xml covers t
his case, and if so, it's an annotations issue. If not, then it's a functionality issue for the spec and should be discussed in its own JIRA issue.
> JDO2 Annotations
> ----------------
>
> Key: JDO-403
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-403
> Project: JDO
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: api2
> Affects Versions: JDO 2 final
> Reporter: Andy Jefferson
> Assignee: Michelle Caisse
> Fix For: JDO 2 maintenance release 1
>
> Attachments: embedded.patch, jdo_2_1_annotations.jar
>
>
> It would be desirable for JDO2 to have its own set of annotations. We have developed a set within JPOX that would likely serve as a starting point for such a set. In my opinion they should be
> 1. Split into javax.jdo.annotations.jdo and javax.jdo.annotations.orm
> 2. Move ORM attributes from some of the JDO annotations and have a ORM annotation.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
|