|
|
|
|
| Re: EMF/Teneo and EclipseLink integration [message #376342 is a reply to message #376333] |
Sat, 12 July 2008 14:35   |
|
Originally posted by: tskaufma.gmail.com
Hello,
Will you guys make an example, maybe using the well-known Library Example,
of how to do this?
Thanks,
Trevor Kaufman
"Shaun Smith" <shaun.smith@oracle.com> wrote in message
news:72034d37bd38f419cb8b71053433f87a$1@www.eclipse.org...
> Hi Mikhail,
>
>> I've read this post almost a month ago:
>>
> http://dev.eclipse.org/newslists/news.eclipse.technology.ecl ipselink/msg00107.html
>> It is said that work on integration EMF/Teneo with EclipseLink is on it's
>> way.
>
> With EclipseLink reaching 1.0, some outstanding bugs being resolved, and
> the availability of EclipseLink as OSGi bundles I'm happy to say I have
> been able to upgrade the Teneo EMF/EclipseLink code and I have all my
> existing unit tests working. I'll be committing my changes to the Teneo
> CVS repository in the next few days (I'm out of the office right now).
>
>> Can I ask when exactly it will be finished? And maybe if it will be
>> finished not in one stage, what will be available on each stage?
>
> What we will have to start is support for manually mapping EMF generated
> classes with JPA using EclipseLink--just like you would do with standard
> Java classes. The model driven/top down generation of everything
> including the database will come later as that functionality depends on
> the availability of the code I'm to check in.
>
> --Shaun
>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: EMF/Teneo and EclipseLink integration [message #492210 is a reply to message #381392] |
Mon, 19 October 2009 09:38  |
Shaun Smith Messages: 189 Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Knut,
| Quote: | Is there some other way to instruct Teneo to set the eContainerFeatureID
properly? E.g. by having Teneo defaulting it where possible (as it would
be in the library example) or declaring the desired feature somewhere in
the mapping.
|
There's a bug filed to change how eContainerFeatureId is handled. In the current implementation, the actual int value is stored however it turns out that it would be better to store the feature name and lookup the value.
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=271086
--Shaun
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.01874 seconds