So some databases can't be accessed from JDK 6? That sucks.
I guess the question is from the people that can't go for JDK 6 / JDBC
4, how many are willing to move to the next version of Hibernate anyway.
If it's a small minority, we should move on. If not then we need to
hack around :(
On 22 sept. 09, at 19:36, Steve Ebersole wrote:
JDBC 4 is JDK 1.6, correct.
Because not all deployment environments support jdk 1.6 nor do all
jdbc
drivers support jdbc 4
On Tue, 2009-09-22 at 19:07 +0200, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
> Actually naive question.
> JDBC 4 is JDK 6 right. Since JDK 5 is EOLed at the end of this month,
> Why don't we just stop JDBC 3 support altogether?
>
> On 22 sept. 09, at 18:19, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
>
>> from how I understand Maven, swallow it and go for 2.
>>
>> On 21 sept. 09, at 20:53, Steve Ebersole wrote:
>>
>>>
http://in.relation.to/12371.lace
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org>
>>>
Hibernate.org
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
>>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> hibernate-dev mailing list
>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> hibernate-dev mailing list
> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
--
Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org>
Hibernate.org