Versions Compared

Old Version 1

changes.mady.by.user ASF Infrabot

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user ASF Infrabot

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: null

Goals for OJB 1.1

  • I think "native" JDO support should be in it – JDOSupport
  • out-of-the-box support for storing primitive types. – PrimitiveTypes
  • Better support for all kind of Java Collections and Maps. – CollectionsAndMaps
  • completing the Prevayler based PB implementation. – PrevaylerBroker
  • clear separation of API and SPI parts. In the ATM we this already, having it in the other layers as well ease the maintenance process, as OJB developers we'll immediately see which parts can be changed without changing parts of the API. – ApiSpiSeparation
  • full support mixing of mapping strategies. – MixingMappingStrategies
  • support a real mapping of one class to multiple tables. – OneClassMultipleTables
  • some restructuring would be nice ... e.g. move the reversedb stuff to it's own src dir and jar – OJBTools
  • use jakarta-commons packages (e.g. logging and configuration) – UseCommons
  • i'm playing with oracle spatial at the moment ... not sure if there is a way to support stuff like this .. but it would be nice (wink) – OracleSpatial
  • support for McKoi and AxisDB databases – SupportedDatabases
  • conversion of the XDoclet module to XDoclet 2 – XDoclet2
  • support for generics (Java 1.5) – JavaGenerics
  • creation and manipulation of databases with classes and ant tasks, based on Torque and commons-sql – DatabaseManipulation
  • support for the complete ODMG 3 query language (OQL) as defined in their grammar – OQLComplete

Application Management

  • support for jmx based run time management of broker management extc.
  • Wiki Markup
    I \[thma\] vote for removing support for the S.O.D.A query API (http://sodaquery.sourceforge.net/docs/index.html). I think we should focus on the standards like JDO and ODMG that have found some acceptance in the market.
\\

There are a large number of features proposed for the 1.1 release, it reads more like a wish list than feature list (smile) Why not schedule a number of releases 1.1, 1.2, 1.n, 1.n+ that deliver features based on priority??? I'm sure more users out there care about a JDO implementation than some other features especially now that JD02 is on the way. Besides its much easier to make many smaller releases than a few large ones and should improve the credibility of this fine project. --AndyHullMoved to OJBProjectPages/OJBOnePointOne