Re: Spring/hibernate and JDBC
On Jul 10, 5:24 am, r...@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote:
Jack <junw2...@gmail.com> writes:
With spring and hibernate so popular now, is there anybody still only
use JDBC to write database application code? Thanks.
I like the idea of JPA, but AFAIK, no implementation is part
of Java SE? So the canonical way to develope a desktop
application with JPA would be to mix Java SE with a database
and a JPA implementation?
I dislike to depend on too many different libraries and
providers (i.e., Java SE is provided by Oracle, Hibernate by
another party, the database possibly by another party).
I am disappointed that Derby is only part of the JDK, but
not of the JRE. I surely would love Derby and an JPA
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