Hi Michael,

> I think we should use the same name for all four annotation type and if
> "boundTypes" is not meaningful we should go for "types".

+1
"types" is shorter, is more meaningful, and is what many people are already=
=20
using for the @Element, @Key, @Value. Yes I know Apache JDO haven't had a=20
release, but there are some people who are using them.


PS.1. Previously someone added the single form of this to @Field, @Element,=
=20
@Key, @Value yet they have now silently disappeared. Are they coming back o=
r=20
leaving permanently ? Since I took the time to implement support for it, no=
w=20
I have to strip it back out ?


PS.2. Can we have some sort of release of Apache JDO jdo2 SNAPSHOT jar to s=
ome=20
location (date stamped perhaps) ? You're not in that "incubator" thing now=
=20
and the only way to demonstrate to people that JDO is still alive is to=20
actually provide them with samples of the deliverable (suitably named to=20
represent its status).


=2D-=20
Andy =A0(Java Persistent Objects - http://www.jpox.org)

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]