Ok - it seems I missed that every package has to be individually specified. Where is the link to the spec for the module-info file. All I seem to be able to find with google are examples and descriptions.
Ralph > On Apr 21, 2017, at 1:40 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > How do I export org.apache.logging.log4j from the log4j-api module and then > be able to export org.apache.logging.log4j.core from the log4j-core module? > My understanding is that exporting a package exports that package and those > beneath it. Is that incorrect? > > Ralph > >> On Apr 21, 2017, at 1:37 PM, Bernd Eckenfels <e...@zusammenkunft.net> wrote: >> >> Around what? there is no problem to have multiple packages in multiple >> modules depending on each other (if you decide to ship modules at all). Only >> split packages is a problem (but this is also a problem for OSGi or code >> signing so nobody should really use that anyway) >> >> Gruss >> Bernd >> -- >> http://bernd.eckenfels.net >> ________________________________ >> From: Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >> Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 10:34:36 PM >> To: Commons Developers List >> Subject: Re: [all] Java 9 module names >> >> I am having a hard time figuring out how Log4j is going to be able to >> support this. The API itself is in org.apache.logging.log4j and some >> packages under that. All the main implementation is under >> org.apache.logging.log4j.core. These obviously overlap. Most of our other >> jars have packages that are in org.apache.logging.log4j.xxx where xxx >> matches the jar name. We aren’t going to change the API to support modules. >> >> Is there some reasonable way around this? >> >> Ralph >> >>> On Apr 21, 2017, at 6:16 AM, Stephen Colebourne <scolebou...@joda.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>> On 21 April 2017 at 13:59, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> What happens when there is a API break which necessitates a package name >>>> change? >>>> I assume that the module name will also need to change to the new >>>> super-package. >>>> e.g. >>>> >>>> Commons-Lang4 >>>> -> super-package org.apache.commons.lang4 >>>> -> module org.apache.commons.lang4 >>> >>> Yes, thats right. >>> >>>> AFAICT Commons generally has obvious and unique super-packages for >>>> each component. >>>> This should make it easier than for larger projects with lots of jars >>>> and potentially overlapping package names. >>>> >>>> However even Commons has some code that uses a different package structure. >>>> e.g. NET uses examples as the super-package. >>>> This includes working examples that are included in the release. >>>> I guess that will have to change (which is probably a good idea anyway). >>> >>> Yes, as it stands, [net] would be a bad modular citizen, because it >>> exposes the "examples" package, and thus prevents any other module >>> from using that package. Just move it to >>> org.apache.commons.net.examples. >>> >>> Stephen >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>> >>> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
