[hibernate-dev] new metamode development status

[Gail Badner]

I've added some info below. John and I will talk more tomorrow and we'll provide more details soon.

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Ebersole" <steve at hibernate.org>
> To: "Strong Liu" <stliu at hibernate.org>
> Cc: "Hibernate hibernate-dev" <hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 5, 2012 5:07:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [hibernate-dev] new metamode development status
> 
> Gail and John can speak better to the overall status of this; I have
> been working on other things the past month+.
> 
> On Tue 05 Jun 2012 02:52:58 AM CDT, Strong Liu wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > As we discussed in the last dev meeting, our main dev resources are
> > moving to the new metamodel branch, since I just find time to
> > start working on it,
> > and not sure about the current status of where we are now, and how
> > much left to finish it.
> 
> Well technically we just said it was time to focus on metamodel (5.0)
> instead of 4.1.  But really thats just John and Gail primarily plus
> you
> and me and Hardy when we have time.  IIRC you said you would be able
> to
> transition to being able to do more work on that code, so thats
> great.
> 
> 
> > So, I'm starting this mail and wondering maybe others can share the
> > current status so we can get the big picture wrt works left and
> > estimate ETA.
> >
> > I think there are 3 areas here:
> >
> > 1. binding
> > 1.1 basic entity binding
> > 1.2 component binding

Last time I looked into component binding (a while ago), I noticed that the resolved Hibernate type was not defined, and that components were not integrated into the persisters.

> > 1.3 association binding

AFAIK, one-to-one is not implemented yet.

Many-to-one on a foreign key is working.

I thought I was done with unidirectional one-to-many on a foreign key (no join table), but found some bugs. I'm wrapping those up currently, then moving to bidirectional one-to-many/many-to-one.

AFIK, no associations using a join table are not implemented yet.

> > 1.5 id binding
> > 1.6 secondary table / join table binding ?
> 
> I did identifier binding quite some time ago.  I am pretty happy with
> how it turned out.  The only part that is "not there" is handling of
> @MapsId and that is just because I came to the realization that that
> really its not the same thing as binding the identifier information.
> So that will be developed as a separate concept.
> 
> Secondary table support is there as well as per the email I sent out
> to
> the dev list a few months ago.  There was a question about whether we
> wanted to expand support there.  The consensus was no, so the
> secondary
> table support matches what used to be possible.
> 
> 
> > 2. persister integration
> 
> Keep in mind the new overall paradigm we set even (even back to the
> Austin meeting).  Namely when you work a feature you should work it
> all
> the way up to integrating it with the persisters.

I've been integrating my work with the persister.

> 
> 
> > 3. test results
> 
> Well there are a few levels of testing here.  Basically we have tried
> to get much more modular in testing of this new code.  So we have
> unit
> tests of the org.hibernate.metamodel.spi.source contracts to make
> sure
> that hbm and annotations are being interpreted as we expect against
> those common org.hibernate.metamodel.spi.source contracts.   Then we
> functional test those org.hibernate.metamodel.spi.source contracts as
> they are consumed into the relational/domain/binding contracts.
> Finally we have functional testing in terms of using the new
> metamodel
> to build a SessionFactory and trying to load/manipulate data etc.  I
> admit it can be tedious sometimes.  But in the long run it helps to
> more easily identify where stuff is breaking when we have a
> bug/regression.
> 
> 
> --
> steve at hibernate.org
> http://hibernate.org
> _______________________________________________
> hibernate-dev mailing list
> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>