+1 we should allow to override this. I think it's material for 6.x , as it ties in with the plans for decoupling the "index schema definition" from the "indexed type", but we could introduce a configuration property already in the current master - something like a type alias.
I probably wouldn't introduce a new annotation now, unless it matches our intent in 6. On 7 November 2017 at 16:13, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.s...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > We just had a couple of very similar questions on SO: > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/47107499/override-elasticsearch-type-in-hibernate-search/47160930 > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/47160030/how-to-configure-type-name-or-filter-by-type-query-with-elasticsearch-integratio > > The first use case makes more sense than the second one but I'm wondering > if we should consider adding some sort of alias to @Indexed to override the > type we use to identify the type of an object. > > WDYT? > > -- > Guillaume > _______________________________________________ > 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
