| Mahmoud Anouti, I'm sorry I believe my explanation before we slightly incorrect. In versions prior to  HHH-13060 Closed and after, both bindings are registered with differing entity-names, those values are actually the FQCN of the class, so having them in separate packages still work. But the additional check in HHH-13060 Closed isn't based on entity-name but instead jpa-entity-name which is a different concept all together. If you revert back to 5.3.7 and check you'll notice the following: FQCN: model1.MyPojo, entity-name: model1.MyPojo, jpa-entity-name: MyPojo
FQCN: model2.MyPojo, entity-name: model2.MyPojo, jpa-entity-name: MyPojo As you can see the last value is the same for both which is actually what triggers the exception. The jpa-entity-name value is sourced from the @Entity annotation's name attribute. Simply setting the value to something unique for both mappings will avoid the exception all together. Is that not something you can do for your use case? |
