Does it have to be a separate module to begin with? For MongoDB - which contains two datastore providers (MongoDB, Fongo) and Redis - which also will have two different dialects as per Mark's pending PR - it's one module.
We should stick to one pattern, and having one module seems easier on the user to me. So unless you see a strong advantage for two modules I'd say let's use one. Regarding the provider names, "infinispan" and "infinspan-remote" seem good. If you think remote will be more common eventually, we may rename the current one and have "infinispan-embedded" and "infinispan". Requires a change to existing users, but it seems acceptable to do in 5. I would not have "hotrod" in the name, this is a technicality I'd prefer to not expose at this level. Rather "remote" vs. "embedded" which will be stable also if specific protocols change. --Gunnar 2015-12-14 18:57 GMT+01:00 Sanne Grinovero <sa...@hibernate.org>: > Hello all, > while creating the basic scaffolding for the new GridDialect, I > called the new Maven module "hibernate-ogm-infinispan-hotrod". Which > is rather long, but descriptive. > > Q1: any better name? > > > The current one which we have working on Infinispan "embedded mode" > is named "hibernate-ogm-infinispan". > > Q2: do we need to rename the existing one? If not, what to we call it > in our documentation to disambiguate? > > > Thanks, > Sanne > _______________________________________________ > 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
