untime.
>
> Gruss
> Bernd
> --
> http://bernd.eckenfels.net
>
> From: jodastep...@gmail.com on behalf of Stephen
> Colebourne
> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 1:42:33 PM
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [all] Java 9 module na
m on behalf of Stephen
Colebourne
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 1:42:33 PM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [all] Java 9 module names
On 24 April 2017 at 11:08, Jörg Schaible wrote:
> Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>
>> Sounds like you could use --add-modules to add the module separ
On 24 April 2017 at 11:08, Jörg Schaible wrote:
> Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>
>> Sounds like you could use --add-modules to add the module separately
>> from the command line, or add the module to the application's
>> module-info rather than the libraries.
>>
>> In general, I suspect a library mod
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> Sounds like you could use --add-modules to add the module separately
> from the command line, or add the module to the application's
> module-info rather than the libraries.
>
> In general, I suspect a library module-info.java should depend only on
> the other modules
Sounds like you could use --add-modules to add the module separately
from the command line, or add the module to the application's
module-info rather than the libraries.
In general, I suspect a library module-info.java should depend only on
the other modules it really needs (eg. the API of slf4j),
Hm why is that? What step in your compile would need the runtime module?
Gruss
Bernd
--
http://bernd.eckenfels.net
From: Ralph Goers
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 7:14:02 PM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [all] Java 9 module names
Yes, I know it doesn&#
Yes, I know it doesn't replace Maven, but in this case I have a dependency that
is not required to compile but is required to run. It appears I have to convert
my runtime scopes to compile in order to get the module to compile and build
properly.
That sucks.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 23,
I've never used that myself, but don't see anything similar.
Remember though that JPMS isn't trying to replace Maven. It just
intends there to be a reliable set of modules when running in the
platform.
Stephen
On 23 April 2017 at 08:57, Ralph Goers wrote:
> How does the module system support Ma
How does the module system support Maven’s runtime scope?
Ralph
> On Apr 21, 2017, at 10:48 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>
> See http://blog.joda.org/2017/04/java-9-modules-jpms-basics.html and
> https://www.slideshare.net/scolebourne/java-se-9-modules-jpms-an-introduction
>
> Basically, yo
With regards to Log4j 1, just making v2 as compatible as possible with v1
should hopefully be enough.
As for lang v2, is there nothing stopping us from releasing a 2.7 artifact
with Java 9 support? Same goes for older major versions of Commons projects.
On 22 April 2017 at 13:03, Gary Gregory wr
What a mess. I wonder if we should do something more official with log4j1.
I guess we can wait and see...
On Apr 22, 2017 10:59 AM, "Ralph Goers" wrote:
> Gary, if you are transitioning to use Java 9 modules I think it is
> appropriate that it be expected that only the latest versions will suppo
Gary, if you are transitioning to use Java 9 modules I think it is appropriate
that it be expected that only the latest versions will support them. Upgrading
to Java 9 is not going to be as simple as just replacing the java runtime and
running. They have removed lots of deprecated classes. See
On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Pascal Schumacher <
pascalschumac...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Is this really necessary?
>
> Imho people who use (update to) java 9 should not use these "ancient"
> versions but update.
>
Sadly this is unrealistic and at times impossible due to transitive
dependencies. I
Is this really necessary?
Imho people who use (update to) java 9 should not use these "ancient"
versions but update.
Am 22.04.2017 um 10:00 schrieb Emmanuel Bourg:
Le 22/04/2017 à 01:02, Stephen Colebourne a écrit :
I've started a page here:
https://github.com/jodastephen/jpms-module-names/b
, April 22, 2017 10:16:40 AM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [all] Java 9 module names
On 22 April 2017 at 09:00, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
Le 22/04/2017 à 01:02, Stephen Colebourne a écrit :
I've started a page here:
https://github.com/jodastephen/jpms-module-names/blob/master/README.m
is a good one (as long as
they do not require imports?)
Gruss
Bernd
--
http://bernd.eckenfels.net
From: jodastep...@gmail.com on behalf of Stephen
Colebourne
Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2017 10:16:40 AM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [all] Java 9 module
On 22 April 2017 at 09:00, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 22/04/2017 à 01:02, Stephen Colebourne a écrit :
>> I've started a page here:
>> https://github.com/jodastephen/jpms-module-names/blob/master/README.md
>> Feel free to raise a PR with more projects at commons or elsewhere in
>> Apache - I'm jus
Le 22/04/2017 à 01:02, Stephen Colebourne a écrit :
> I've started a page here:
> https://github.com/jodastephen/jpms-module-names/blob/master/README.md
> Feel free to raise a PR with more projects at commons or elsewhere in
> Apache - I'm just checking the Javadoc and releases to ensure there
> ar
On 22 April 2017 at 05:18, Matt Sicker wrote:
> Despite all the shit the Java champions talk about OSGi, Jigsaw is still a
> simplified version of OSGi basically, so anything already supported via
> OSGi will generally port extremely easily to Java 9 modules.
JPMS (Jigsaw) is not a simplified OSG
See http://blog.joda.org/2017/04/java-9-modules-jpms-basics.html and
https://www.slideshare.net/scolebourne/java-se-9-modules-jpms-an-introduction
Basically, you need "requires static" for optional dependencies. The
exception if for a module where the dependency is an annotation where
you don't ne
Despite all the shit the Java champions talk about OSGi, Jigsaw is still a
simplified version of OSGi basically, so anything already supported via
OSGi will generally port extremely easily to Java 9 modules.
As for the optional modules, it sounds like static module imports are the
way to declare o
On to the next question - which I apologize for asking as it may not apply to
Commons. Log4j has lots of optional components to support lots of third party
stuff (some ASF projects and some not). How do we handle things that haven’t
yet been modularized? Normally I would expect to have requires
Thanks for taking a look Stephen. I appreciate the guidance. I will be sure to
submit a PR when I get something going with Log4j 2.
Ralph
> On Apr 21, 2017, at 3:01 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>
> Some rules:
> - Each module contains a set of packages, each of which must be
> specified expli
I've started a page here:
https://github.com/jodastephen/jpms-module-names/blob/master/README.md
Feel free to raise a PR with more projects at commons or elsewhere in
Apache - I'm just checking the Javadoc and releases to ensure there
are no problems.
Stephen
On 21 April 2017 at 13:49, Stephen
Some rules:
- Each module contains a set of packages, each of which must be
specified explicitly.
- Modules depend on other modules, but must not form a cycle of dependencies.
- No package can be in two modules
Looking at the Javadoc here -
https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/javadoc.html - it se
From: Ralph Goers
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 10:40:01 PM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [all] Java 9 module names
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
OSGi or
>>> code signing so nobody should really use that anyway)
>>>
>>> Gruss
>>> Bernd
>>> --
>>> http://bernd.eckenfels.net
>>>
>>> From: Ralph Goers
>>> Sent: Friday, April 21, 2
code
>> signing so nobody should really use that anyway)
>>
>> Gruss
>> Bernd
>> --
>> http://bernd.eckenfels.net
>>
>> From: Ralph Goers
>> Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 10:34:36 PM
>> To: Commons Develo
should really use that anyway)
>
> Gruss
> Bernd
> --
> http://bernd.eckenfels.net
>
> From: Ralph Goers
> Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 10:34:36 PM
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [all] Java 9 module names
>
> I am
://bernd.eckenfels.net
From: Ralph Goers
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
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 th
On 21 April 2017 at 13:59, sebb 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.ap
On 21 April 2017 at 13:49, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> Right now, I don't recommend adding a module-info.java file. Java 9 is
> not released, the tools are still under development, and the binary
> format may yet change. All we are agreeing is that the module name
> will be `org.apache.commons.lan
On 21 April 2017 at 13:00, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> Hi All,
> Java 9 is coming soon (unless it is delayed again, but that seems
> unlikely). The major feature is JPMS, the Java Platform Module System.
> While JPMS is far from ideal, projects like Apache Commons and mine
> Joda-* are going to be
Right now, I don't recommend adding a module-info.java file. Java 9 is
not released, the tools are still under development, and the binary
format may yet change. All we are agreeing is that the module name
will be `org.apache.commons.lang3`, which doesn't change the release
:-)
What we need is a p
Le 21/04/2017 à 14:00, Stephen Colebourne a écrit :
> Comments? Questions?
Hi Stephen,
Thank you for stopping by and enlightening us about JPMS. The new module
system looks like a huge mess. I understand the need for modularization
at the JRE level, but I haven't figured out yet how this extra
c
I support this.
Also good to know is that recently we managed to make the Jigsaw team
reintroduce the NumberAtEnd[1] in the module name, which makes it again
possible that commons-lang, commons-lang2 and commons-lang3 can live next
to each other on the modulepath.
Robert
[1]
http://mai
Hi All,
Java 9 is coming soon (unless it is delayed again, but that seems
unlikely). The major feature is JPMS, the Java Platform Module System.
While JPMS is far from ideal, projects like Apache Commons and mine
Joda-* are going to be key to getting some adoption. This is
particularly true as Comm
38 matches
Mail list logo
