Re: [Adempiere-tang] the TANG is dead. Long live tang TANG!

[Johan I. <Joh...@ag...>]

=20


Hi Kontro,

>Short version: I am canceling TANG

It=92s sad to hear that you=92re giving up on tang..

Shouldn=92t you step back to the original plan of JPA..? I mean it may =
not be a complete one.. but it is a step towards the standard way of =
doing things in an enterprise.. no?=20

I haven=92t quite dug deep to the parts that are hard to be =
JPA-ed..Would you kindly point out some..? may be others might help if =
you did so..

Kontro wrote:
>I lost my faith for current codebase just before Christmas.=20
>I felt that it were going faster to make rewrite than=20
>modify current version.=20

Well maybe not a whole rewrite.. but a lot.. After looking at the code a =
couple of days ago..I searched for the string PreparedStatement on the =
source and got over 1k refernces..

The foundation that JJ has laid is solid..don=92t you think..?  Other =
packages that use org.compiere.model.* still can see it as a business =
model without realizing that it uses JDBC or JPA..no? So it=92s =
transparent=20

I mean this could be the first step.. ??


>First plan were just to rewrite current functionality to=20
>use JPA and EJB3. But there is big difference on how JPA=20
>and JDBC handle data. In JPA everything is tied into=20
>entity objects. JPA is not so flexible than dynamic SQL=20
>queries.=20
=20
May be there some workaround..? let=92s just keep on digging..no?

May be to JPA the parts that are straight forward.. and to somehow =
layer/abstract the parts that are dynamic in nature?

=20

Best regards,

Johan Iskandar

=20


--=20
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/655 - Release Date: =
28/01/2007 13:12
=20