[hibernate-dev] Could we have a Hibernate 5.3 compatibility layer that includes the ORM 5.1 Hibernate Session class

Steve Ebersole steve at hibernate.org
Thu Feb 8 13:50:12 EST 2018

What is meant by "(JPA/native application) compatible with the Hibernate
ORM versions that we include"?

Both 5.3 and 6.0 are JPA 2.2, but 5.1 is JPA 2.1.  Does that mean they
violate that requirement?

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 12:30 PM Scott Marlow <smarlow at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 01/31/2018 10:49 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> > Not to mention, I'm really not even sure what this request "means".  As
> > we all understand 5.1 -> 5.2 unified SessionFactory/EntityManagerFactory
> > and Session/EntityManager, and that caused us to have to make changes to
> > certain method signatures - most notably `Session#getFlushMode` was one
> > of the problems.  Session defined that returning a FlushMode; however
> > JPA also defined this same method, although poorly named IMO since it
> > instead returns JPA's FlushModeType (so why the method is not called
> > `#getFlushModeType` is beyond me.  Anyway the point is that there is no
> > way to rectify these - there is no way that we can define a contract
> > that simultaneously conforms to both.
> >
> > As Sanne said, and as we all agreed during f2f, the best approach is to
> > have both versions available for use.
> Which Hibernate ORM release would be best for the second version that we
> include?  ORM 5.3 or 6.0?
> Agreed that we will still include ORM 5.1, in WildFly.  For the second
> ORM version that we include (whatever the version is), we have an
> additional requirement now.  Future releases of WildFly need to be
> (JPA/native application) compatible with the Hibernate ORM versions that
> we include.
> We will be releasing WildFly more frequently, and want users to be able
> to able to keep up with our pace, as we release more often.
> Scott

More information about the hibernate-dev mailing list