I am thinking of users here. Since there will be multiple jpa api jars out there I liked the idea of the jar name itself encoding the fact that this is the one from hibernate. I think this is more user friendly. I hear what you are saying though about the ability to bootstrap any/all providers.
-- Sent from my Palm Prē st...@hibernate.org http://hibernate.orgEmmanuel Bernard wrote: I would use org.hibernate.javax.persistence:jpa-2.0-api:1.0.0-SNAPSHOT Because while there is code written by us, it's not specific to Hibernate and can bootstrap all providers on the market. On 11 déc. 2009, at 22:24, Steve Ebersole wrote: > Of course that should be > org.hibernate.javax.persistence:hibernate-jpa-2.0-api:1.0.0-SNAPSHOT > > ;) > > On Fri, 2009-12-11 at 14:59 -0600, Steve Ebersole wrote: >> I think there is a consensus we need to rename our JPA api jar. The >> main concern is that we should be capturing the spec version in the >> artifact name but that the versioning should be its own thing since >> there is in fact Hibernate specific code in the classes that we will >> have need to maintain and release independently. >> >> I propose the following naming: >> org.hibernate.javax.persistence:hibernate-jpa-2.1-api:1.0.0-SNAPSHOT >> >> Unless I hear different options I will make this change this weekend. >> >> At that time I will also publish a release of it as 1.0.0-CR-1 >> > -- > Steve Ebersole <st...@hibernate.org> > Hibernate.org > > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
