[hibernate-dev] Hibernate ORM 6.0 groupId/artifactId (was: Re: NoORM - New groupId and relocation artifacts)

[Gunnar Morling]

Agreed, it'd be the right time if we wanted to change this.

I vote for 1 in case we do it.

In ORM it's enough for many use cases to just add that core module,
hence I like the more concise "hibernate-orm" id (similar to
"hibernate-validator"). It's a bit different for OGM and HSEARCH where
one needs core and typically another module with the NoSQL/indexing
backend (hence I like "hibernate-ogm-core" there).



2017-01-30 17:31 GMT+01:00 Steve Ebersole <steve at hibernate.org>:
> Relatedly, I have been thinking whether we want to rename the ORM artifacts
> as well since this is the best time if we wanted to do that.
>
> So we know we will change the groupId to `org.hibernate.orm`.
>
> I was thinking we might want to also either:
>
>    1. rename `hibernate-core` as `hibernate-orm`
>    2. rename all the artifacts following the pattern `hibernate-orm-${1}`,
>    e.g. `hibernate-orm-core`, `hibernate-orm-osgi`, etc.
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 10:26 AM Steve Ebersole <steve at hibernate.org> wrote:
>
>> Well let's investigate what this consistency means across projects first.
>> As Sanne mentions, if it makes it building ORM more difficult then I'd be
>> -1 it too.  But I promise to take a peek when I get back from PTO in a few
>> days.  Or maybe Andrea can in the next few days as he already has worked on
>> the changes to release relocation artifacts for ORM; I just do not know
>> when he is coming back from PTO.  Either way we will have looked at it for
>> ORM by the end of week.
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 7:11 AM Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Sanne Grinovero <sanne at hibernate.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Different projects have different needs. Consistency is nice, and
>> > certainly makes it easier to find oneself comfortably "at home" when
>> > jumping from one project to another, but it also is inconvenient to do
>> > things "for consistency" when one has different requirements.
>> >
>>
>> I don't think we would have different requirements regarding the relocation
>> artifacts.
>>
>> But if you see any issue with the approach we chose for HV, interesting in
>> hearing them so that we can have the same approach for the different NoORM
>> project.
>>
>> --
>> Guillaume
>> _______________________________________________
>> hibernate-dev mailing list
>> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> hibernate-dev mailing list
> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev