On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 at 08:39, Yoann Rodiere <yrodi...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Yet I'm convinced that having a release > > which provides full JPA 3.0 TCK between 5 and 6 (or however it gets > > renamed) would be no good to us, as it would create an adoption > > barrier for both cathegories of people: the ones not interested to > > migrate away from JPA2, and the ones not interested to migrate beyond > > JPA3. > > I get that, but I'm definitely not as hopeful as you are as to the > reliability of those bytecode hacks you mentioned. But I guess that's an > uphill battle. > I'm not a fan of bytecode hacks either, so maybe let's just see what a POC looks like before tearing it down? What's to stop you from supporting JPA2.0 in ORM 7, with the same hacks you > mentioned for JPA3? > Right, and in fact I mentioned as one of the possibilities for ORM6 to be able to read and interpret the "legacy" annotations from JPA2. I believe that's important to not get in the way of adoption but rather actively help with some flexibility, otherwise people will have a very hard time to upgrade to 6, and that's something that risks becoming a significant burden on us all. Thanks, Sanne > - People who want JPA3 only have a hack-free ORM 7 that happens to > support JPA2 annotations. > - People who want JPA2 can migrate to ORM 7, and we'll provide hacks > to make it work. > > At least we wouldn't be penalizing people who want to migrate to JPA3 with > potentially unreliable bytecode hacks. Only people who want the latest and > greatest on an older API (which is, after all, quite an unreasonable > request) would have to put up with that. > And we'll be able to completely ignore these hacks in ORM 8 after we > rebased it on 7, since ORM 8 will drop support for JPA2 (I hope?). > > Yoann Rodière > > Sr. Software Engineer, Middleware Engineering, Hibernate team > > Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com> > > <https://www.redhat.com> > > > On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 at 00:17, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.s...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:12 PM Sanne Grinovero <sa...@hibernate.org> >> wrote: >> >> > The "big bang" approach that Validator implemented is an option as >> > well; but the context is a bit different as we're having an actual >> > major release being developed, and the matter of possible time >> > pressure. >> > >> >> Thus the proposal of Yoann and me to just rename the current 6 to a later >> version and release a new major version that only contains the Jakarta >> package change. >> >> That way, we don't end up doing additional work and having weird versions >> partially supporting both. >> >> -- >> Guillaume >> _______________________________________________ >> hibernate-dev mailing list >> hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev