Hi,
I noticed there are a lot of work migrating bindings to 2.0, why no work is done in migrating the persistence? Any other reason other than the amount of work?
Thanks;
What are you complaining about? I’m using persistence in OH2, all of the used persistence bindings are of version 1.9, but they are fully working with OH2!
Not complaining, not want to start playing with it if they are planning big changes or things comming soon.
IMHO nobody will put effort in a binding that is already working with virtually no problems. But that is MY opinion as an user with less then a year experience.
I don’t ask to put effort here, my question was more related to something new comming.
…and I tried to reply that there will be none ( as far as I can tell)
Manuel,
My I ask why you are asking this?
Because persistence should be working in OH2.
Stef
There is work ongoing. I have already updated the persistence REST service to allow querying and modifying the persistence store. At the same time the persistence interface was updated to provide maintenance features and I implemented a new persistence service for H2 as a reference.
The H2 persistence service is now being modified in ESH but hopefully will be merged soon.
Really easy. I’m just starting to plan the persistence service for my OH installation and don’t want to waste time if there is something else coming soon.
Also, want to use full 2.0 capabilities without the compatibility layer. I know it works, but want to be fully 2.0.
I wouldn’t bank on ‘soon’ as this isn’t a high priority clearly. However, I would expect that databases are backward compatible, so should not really be an issue.
Why? What is the actual need that you have?