JDO: 1.0 is released, but Forte shuns it!

by Dion Almaer

Java Data Objects are here. Or are they?



JDO 1.0 Final


There was a big announcement of the long awaited 1.0 version of the JDO specification.
Not only do we have the spec, but also the Reference Implementation, and Technology Compatibility Kit.



You can read announcements on the new JDO site JDO Central (sponsored by vendors), and from Craig (spec lead).




With vendor support, the vote in, and now a 1.0 final spec, all is well in JDO land right? Maybe not.




Forte discontinues Transparent Persistence



Surely if ONE project would be behind JDO it would be Forte right? Didn't Craig work on it?
However, check out this thread and you see that Forte has changed their tune and is recommending that people use Thought Inc's CocoBase.




The CEO of Thought Inc (Ward Mullins) has been an opponent to the spec as it is today. He has spoken out on many forums, his main beefs revolve around the bytecode manipulation, and lack of O/R-ish items in the spec (like defining the mapping role).




Is JDO 1.0 good enough to get going? Can we get all parties together to make 2.0 good for all?
How much of this is politics versus technology?