[Engine-devel] jpa annotations

[Allon Mureinik]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Kolesnik" <mkolesni at redhat.com>
> To: "engine-devel" <engine-devel at ovirt.org>
> Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim at redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik" <amureini at redhat.com>
> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 3:16:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] jpa annotations
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim at redhat.com>
> > > To: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhornyak at redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel at ovirt.org>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 11:52:39 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] jpa annotations
> > > 
> > > On 12/18/2012 03:55 PM, Laszlo Hornyak wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > We have JPA annotations on the backend entity beans, but they
> > > > have
> > > > never been actually used as far as I know and now that I looked
> > > > into VmTemplate for example we do not even have a vm_template
> > > > table anymore, while VmTemplate still refers to it.
> > > > Any plans with the JPA?
> > > >
> > > 
> > > I'm assuming they are from the work on moving to hibernate
> > > started
> > > a
> > > long time ago, and question is are we going to finish it anytime
> > > soon.
> 
> Yes it was done a couple of year ago but never made it past a "POC"
> state.
> 
> > It's not a case of finishing it, it's a case of redoing it.
> > These annotations are not being maintainted anymore, and a large
> > percent of them are now irrelevant.
> 
> Indeed, they are mostly getting in the way and interfering with
> understanding the code..
> 
> As I see it there are 3 options:
>  1. Do nothing and just live with them.
>  2. Remove them completely and all hibernate related work.
>  3. Write DAOs that work with hibernate and start using them.
> 
> For me #1 is not that great since currently it's just garbage that
> sits there unmaintained..
> I would like to see #3 happen but I think that it's easier to do #2
> first, and then each DAO can be treated separately (there's already
> the infrastructure for that in place).
> 
> I know it might seem wasteful to do #2 instead of #3 but:
>  * We don't have anyone to pick up #3 and work on it to get it to a
>  good state.
>  * The hibernate work that's been done is really cross product, but I
>  don't see why we wouldn't do it in an iterative way instead of
>  forcing all DAOs to switch in one fell swoop..
>  * The work that has been done, is not that much that we would "cry"
>  over deleting it..

#1 is just bad, as I think we can all agree.
As Edmund Burke (probably did not) say - "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

re #2 and #3 - considering the state that these annotation are currently in, #3 probably includes removing more than 50% of the current annotations, so...
+2 on doing #2.


> 
> Your thoughts?
> 
> Regards,
> Mike
>