On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 at 08:39, Yoann Rodiere <yrodiere(a)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.smet(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:12 PM Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>
>