[hibernate-dev] Default access type and MappedSuperclass

[andrea boriero]

I'm not sure I have fully understood the issue, the @Id may be not defined
in the MappedSuperclass but for sure it must be in the subclasses extending
it.

I have tried and I can reproduce the issue only if I do not specify any @Id
annotation in the subclass, but as soon as I add the @Id to a subclass of
the MappedSuperclass the generated static metamodel is correct.


On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 11:04, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> We recently had this issue opened about us not choosing the right access
> type for a mapped super class:
> https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-12938 .
>
> Hibernate currently base the access type decision on the sole placement of
> the @Id annotation, which, in the case of a @MappedSuperclass might not be
> defined (this is the OP's case).
>
> I closed the issue explaining what we do and pointing a workaround but the
> OP rightfully replied with the JPA spec saying "The default access type of
> an entity hierarchy is determined by the placement of mapping annotations
> on the attributes of the entity classes and mapped superclasses of the
> entity hierarchy that do not explicitly specify an access type".
>
> I'm wondering if we should also consider the @Column annotations placement
> if there is no @Id annotation.
>
> If the answer is that it's already fixed in 6, it's all good for me :).
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> Guillaume
> _______________________________________________
> hibernate-dev mailing list
> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>