I am personally against this idea. You mention renaming one single class, but in reality we would need different FQNs for each and every class otherwise we run into a clash in the class loader as to which one wins (the one from hibernate4 jar or the one from hibernate3 jar).
This is a bad path to start down. As an illustration, we had the same issue with JBoss Cache for some time and we simply had 2 sub-projects, one for each version. Which in my mind is the perfectly reasonable approach. On Fri 15 Jul 2011 08:55:23 AM CDT, Scott Marlow wrote: > If someone wanted to include both Hibernate 3 + Hibernate 4 in the same > project, that might be easier if the Hibernate 4 artifacts had a version > number in it or was changed for every new major release. I don't think > Maven supports building two versions of the same artifact (at the same > dependency level). > > For the persistence provider name, > org.hibernate.ejb.HibernatePersistence, I'm wondering if we could have a > org.hibernate.ejb.HibernatePersistence4 in addition, that could be used > to uniquely reference Hibernate 4.x persistence providers. > > I assume this is too late in the Hibernate 4 cycle to change, but wanted > to bring the idea up. > > Changing the artifact names would impact other projects that depends on > Hibernate4 and would need to sync up with the changes as well. > > What do you think? > > Scott > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev -- st...@hibernate.org http://hibernate.org _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
