It's expected.
Commons Annotations is used by both Hibernate Search and HibernateCore (via
annotations and entity-manager) and therefore has an independent release cycle.
On 17 avr. 2010, at 06:06, Strong Liu wrote:
> why hibernate core and hibernate common annotations use different version
> i
On Apr 17, 2010, at 6:36 PM, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
> It's expected.
> Commons Annotations is used by both Hibernate Search and HibernateCore (via
> annotations and entity-manager) and therefore has an independent release
> cycle.
no :(
i didn't mean the different version, but the identifier,
The JBoss convention is . but 3.5 has been using - before the convention was
settled so Steve keep it to avoid confusion. 3.6 will be able to be aligned.
On 17 avr. 2010, at 12:38, Strong Liu wrote:
>
> On Apr 17, 2010, at 6:36 PM, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
>
>> It's expected.
>> Commons Annotat
We need both. So really what is the difference?
On Sat, 2010-04-17 at 12:29 +0800, Strong Liu wrote:
> as that jdbc4 issue has been resolved, so i don't know if there is any
> specific reason that we cant apply this :
>
> Index: parent/pom.xml
> =
the difference is with this change, if someone only has jdk6 installed, then it
can be used to build hibernate source code instead of installing another jdk.
so the question is is there any known issue that causes hibernate components,
expect the ones that explicitly ask jdk6, *must* be build on
Again, we need *both*.
On Sat, 2010-04-17 at 21:59 +0800, Strong Liu wrote:
> the difference is with this change, if someone only has jdk6 installed, then
> it can be used to build hibernate source code instead of installing another
> jdk.
>
> so the question is is there any known issue that c
Okay, after the discussion with Steve on IRC, here is the update:
1. lots of intended contributors only has a JDK6, so with this change can
simplify the process to contribute to hibernate and simple is good :)
2. there is no known issue/bug that blocks hibernate be built on jdk6.
3. we must make
while I see many developers having only JDK6 these days, after looking
at all the requirements you just listed it looks like simpler to keep
enforcing 1.5 :)
Regards,
Sanne
2010/4/17 Strong Liu :
> Okay, after the discussion with Steve on IRC, here is the update:
>
> 1. lots of intended contribut
