Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!news.glorb.com!postnews.google.com!28g2000pry.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: lewbloch Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Spring/hibernate and JDBC Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 11:31:42 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 42 Message-ID: <9b75e0e8-80e7-4e9f-b18d-aa47e8bb16c5@28g2000pry.googlegroups.com> References: <3c16e5e7-3c0b-4126-9dd9-88f372a58f03@e26g2000prf.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.19.62.231 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1310409102 21800 127.0.0.1 (11 Jul 2011 18:31:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 18:31:42 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: 28g2000pry.googlegroups.com; posting-host=172.19.62.231; posting-account=CP-lKQoAAAAGtB5diOuGlDQk0jIwmH0T User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-Google-Web-Client: true X-Google-Header-Order: ASELCHRU X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/535.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/13.0.782.41 Safari/535.1,gzip(gfe) Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:6080 On Jul 10, 5:24=A0am, r...@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote: > Jack writes: > >With spring and hibernate so popular now, is there anybody still only > >use JDBC to write database application code? Thanks. > > =A0 I like the idea of JPA, but AFAIK, no implementation is part > =A0 of Java SE? So the canonical way to develope a desktop > =A0 application with JPA would be to mix Java SE with a database > =A0 and a JPA implementation? > > =A0 I dislike to depend on too many different libraries and > =A0 providers (i.e., Java SE is provided by Oracle, Hibernate by > =A0 another party, the database possibly by another party). > > =A0 I am disappointed that Derby is only part of the JDK, but > =A0 not of the JRE. I surely would love Derby and an JPA > =A0 implementation to be part of Java SE! JPA is a standard, and all implementations work with Java SE. Derby is free to distribute and not always needed in every JRE installation, so why include it for the grand majority of users who don't need it? If it's needed, the app will include the JAR, since every Java developer will use the JDK and therefore will have Derby. That suffices. One advantage of the current distribution strategy is that the developer can choose the DB and JPA providers. Another is that the user only gets the libs needed for their apps. That the SE comes from wherever (Oracle, IBM, another party), the database from wherever (Derby, Postgres), and the JPA from a third (Oracle, Apache), is not a detriment but an asset. It's called choice. Learn to like it. -- Lew