http://in.relation.to/12371.lace Thoughts? -- Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org&gt; Hibernate.org _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

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&gt; >> 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

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&gt; >>>> 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&gt; > Hibernate.org >

3.5 (at least annotations and EM) targets EE 6 app servers as we will depend on JPA 2, so it likely won't work in old app servers (different bootstrap contract). The lack of feature support is a bitch though. On 22 sept. 09, at 19:55, Steve Ebersole wrote: > How many app servers support jdk 1.6 at this point? > > As for the drivers, i believe most have jdbc 4 drivers available. The > bigger question is how many really support the jdbc 4 features as > opposed to implement the methods and do nothing or throw > unsupportedoperationexception? Back when Gail and I first started > looking at this quite a few fell into this latter category. > > On Tue, 2009-09-22 at 19:42 +0200, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: >> 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&gt; >>>>>> 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&gt; >>> Hibernate.org >>> >> > -- > Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org&gt; > Hibernate.org >